T
tonyrey
Guest
I agree. That is why the only rational basis for the principles of liberty, equality and fraternity is belief in God.
Not throwing out the baby with the bathwater: why don't atheists typically reject secular values derived from religion?
- Status
J
Joan1969
Guest
Hi Inocente,
In reading this point, I’m wondering where you make room for moral authority. It is one thing to question so that one can understand, and quite another to start with skepticism. Both approaches might make sense, depending on who has made a moral assertion or suggestion to us. If the person (or group) has no authority, then a good deal of skepticism and a proportionate need for evidence and logical proof is appropriate. If the person or group does have authority it makes sense to accept their teaching from the outset, and then ask questions in order to develop understanding.
It is perfectly normal to grant moral authority to a variety of sources. Parents, teachers, and the law of the land are all moral authorities, even though fallible. We should give them the benefit of the doubt, but they are subject to being questioned and rejected if their authority is abused. As a Catholic, I grant an even stronger authority to the Church, especially when we are talking about the core of the Faith which has been consistent for the past 2000 years. I didn’t give the Church that moral authority over myself arbitrarily; I believe she demonstrates this authority from what she is in history and how she came out of the authority of Jesus Himself.
Lots of non-Catholics may have great things to say on a variety of subjects, and the Church has always acknowledged this (as when she studied the pagan patrimony and preserved their works with respect when they may otherwise have been lost). But the Church does have an authority that is unique, both with respect to theology and the moral law.
I would also point out that people do not typically make their moral decisions simply based on evidence, but on a variety of personal and social factors. With no moral authority, increasing moral chaos and corruption results.
God Bless,
Joan
R
Ranklyfrank
Guest
That doesn’t necessarily wash even for someone who believes in God, Tonyrey. Belief as such is reasoning from an assumed premise and is not the Source of any of those. The cargo cultists believed in the god of cargo. Was that a basis for liberty, equality and fraternity? Go deeper, grasshopper.
T
tonyrey
Guest
All reasoning is from assumed premises. Can you name any that are not?
There is a slight difference between the god of cargo and the God of Christianity.
Go deeper, flea!
R
Ranklyfrank
Guest
“I AM/am”
None. They are both thought beliefs.There is a slight difference between the god of cargo and the God of Christianity.
Go deeper, flea!
M
mellestad
Guest
@OP: Why would we want to reject values derived from religion just because they were religious? That seems arbitrary…I guess I don’t understand what assumptions would lead you to think an atheist would want to do such a thing be default.
Could you elaborate?
Could you elaborate?
T
tonyrey
Guest
T
tonyrey
Guest
Because atheists like Dawkins proclaim that religion is the root of evil!
M
mellestad
Guest
What?
Edit: I guess you’re just being sarcastic. I was confused, I thought you were trying to make a point. My bad, I need to adjust my sarcasm meter, I guess.
Do you have anything constructive to say about my question though?
R
Ranklyfrank
Guest
Have you ever engaged in the inquiry “Who/what am I/” to its conclusion? If you did, you would not be asking these questions and you would be laughing your donkey off with me at some pub over an ale or some good tea.
Yes, that is correct. By their fruits you shall know them. But your “knowledge” of the Christ is an intellectual fiction as a result of faith, as Real as the Christ actually is.
I
inocente
Guest
Hi Joan
My only moral authority is my partner.
Young people need guidance from parents and teachers, but I think we should question everything as we grown older. There’s an unfortunate tendency for prejudices to be passed on across generations, so one of the greatest lessons our parents can teach us is to have no unexamined beliefs. Reminds me of an old song by Graham Nash:
*You who are on the road must have a code that you can live by, and so become yourself, because the past is just a good bye. Teach your children well, their father’s hell did slowly go by, and feed them on your dreams, the one they pick’s, the one you’ll know by. Don’t you ever ask them why, if they told you you would cry, so just look at them and sigh and know they love you.
And you of tender years, can’t know the fears that your elders grew by, and so please help them with your youth, they seek the truth before they can die. Teach your parents well, their children’s hell will slowly go by, and feed them on your dreams, the one they pick’s, the one you’ll know by. Don’t you ever ask them why, if they told you you would cry, so just look at them and sigh and know they love you.*
The law of the land can inspire us but can also lag behind popular sentiment. Six years ago the government here in Spain made gay union legal. Most people, including me, had probably never really thought about it before. Two thirds agreed with the change, we realized it made our society fairer.
Interestingly of course, the vast majority here define themselves as Catholic yet went against the RCC, which opposed the change. The Church’s traditions perform a useful role as an anchor, but on this occasion a lot of folk jumped ship. They may get called cafeteria or secularized, but for them these days religion no longer has all the answers.
To be fair, the Baptist faith never even tried, it has little to say about morals except let your conscience be your guide, and I believe we can only form our conscience well by working things out for ourselves rather than letting others do it for us.
In Numbers 31 (raised earlier), I’d say the real lesson for us doesn’t involve any complicated apologetics to excuse Moses, but that he was just plain wrong to think God was on his side alone – it’s never a good idea to assume anyone knows the mind of God.
By evidence, I meant something more than appeals to scripture, tradition, or some other form of authority. You’re right that personal and social factors play a big part, and when undecided we may place more credence in some than others (Pope Benedict’s theology is a personal favorite), but corruption often feeds off unwarranted trust. Teach your children/parents well.
I
inocente
Guest
And God purposely gave us free will and a nifty little thing called conscience.
J
Joan1969
Guest
Good Morning, Inocente,
Looking at history, we see that countless millions of people tolerated and participated in actions that we nowadays find reprehensible. They rationalized it all. Given that, why are we so confident in our own moral judgements? Again, I think some humility is in order here. As human beings, we need a reliable moral guide.
God Bless,
Joan
With respect to fallible authority, I agree. Parents are a good example of an authority that we may need to question as we grow up, possibly moving in a different direction. I know I did. But the teachings of God’s Church are different than the beliefs of an individual.
Assuming the statistic is accurate, it is a good example of the corruption that is caused by an arbitrary and ever-shifting law. The law of the land is only an effective authority when it is grounded in sound principles. Changes should improve the confomity of the law to the bedrock principles. Civil rights would have been an example of this good change. Gay rights undermine the moral foundation.
Can you see the lack of humility here? Where is the room for God’s action, or for obedience? How does this resemble the teachings of Jesus at all? It is purely the secular attitude of irreligious people. No, these people are not Catholics in any dynamic of living sense of the word.
There are plenty of Baptists here in the States who do not think this way. But they will need to speak for themselves.
With this interpretation, how do we get the Ten Commandments? How can we say they represent the mind of God? There is such a thing as Revelation.
What I would say is that, due to the human condition, it is the personal and social factors that are paramount, unless we make a conscious choice to seek truth. The “make your own way” method leads to personal corruption.
Looking at history, we see that countless millions of people tolerated and participated in actions that we nowadays find reprehensible. They rationalized it all. Given that, why are we so confident in our own moral judgements? Again, I think some humility is in order here. As human beings, we need a reliable moral guide.
God Bless,
Joan
T
tonyrey
Guest
Have you ever engaged in the inquiry “Who/what am I/” to its conclusion? If you did, you would not be asking these questions and you would be laughing your donkey off with me at some pub over an ale or some good tea.
I’m afraid you haven’t answered the question.
I
inocente
Guest
Can’t really comment, except for never understanding how the teaching is different, it just goes straight over my head.
Seems a little arbitrary to exclude gays from civil rights. They contribute to society, pay their taxes and obey the law like everyone else so why differentiate? The main argument against union here was it would undermine marriage, as if denying union didn’t harm marriage by promoting promiscuity. That one went a long way over my head.
But surely the lack of humility is in having pride that we somehow know God’s mind. In the parable of the Good Samaritan Jesus has the Levite and priest walk by while the lowly Samaritan shows mercy.
Incidentally, by my estimate you just wrote off 26 million Catholics as irreligious.
Don’t most Christians apply the commandments selectively though. “Six days you shall labor and do all your work, but the seventh day is a sabbath to the LORD your God. On it you shall not do any work”. How many of us really do no work at all on the Sabbath? In any event, Paul says that’s irrelevant in Romans 14. Then there’s always “for I, the LORD your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me”. Does God really make me pay for whatever my great-grandpappy believed?
I don’t think we can be at all confident. 900 million hungry people in the world, 8 million kids below the age of five die every year. And so on. In five hundred years time countless millions of people will find us reprehensible for what we tolerate and rationalize even with Jesus as our moral guide, so agreed, we need a whole lot of humility and then some.
I
inocente
Guest
Whoa, back up there good fellow. There are a few folk about who might disagree with freedom of conscience in article 18, a few Americans who may say article 22 takes on a socialist agenda, etc.
Christ alone and no other belief system played any part in the inspiration for the Universal Declaration of Human Rights?
Didn’t the Soviet Union also claim it invented everything?
R
Ranklyfrank
Guest
I’m thinking here along slightly different lines. I will first acknowledge that it is my belief that overall, things are improving in the moral dimension for humankind. That’s regardless of our overall rush to mass suicide disguised as the search for comfort and material acquisition compounded by birth rate. And yet, despite about 87% of the world population belonging to some religion or other, large segments of various populations are suffering everything from indignities and injustices to brutalization and murder. And aside from those endemic group actions, there are the prolific acts of violence perpetrated on fellow citizens and individuals themselves. Even the wages of what are claimed to be “just” wars are dear: the number of suicides amongst our military returning from our wars nearly equals those dead in battle; and many of the remainder are emotionally scarred for life, as are combatants anywhere and their victims.
So my question is “Why do religious folks typically reject religious values and secular values allegedly derived from them?”
So my question is “Why do religious folks typically reject religious values and secular values allegedly derived from them?”
C
cho_pilo
Guest
Please define secular values first. The way I understand it is that is an attitude or philosophy of life something like “doing your own thing.” - but i could be wrong.
C
cho_pilo
Guest
Because their morals are not affected by Christ. We must let our moral values be affected by friends and emotions, by the world in which we live. But, most of all, our morals must be affected by Christ. This is what makes a Christian a Christian. In this way we will not be acted upon by the world, but rather we will be the active force of Christ’s love in the world. Only by being true to Christ can we heal both the world and ourselves.
I
inocente
Guest
I wouldn’t say they’re rejected, they’re either temporarily forgotten in anger or rationalized away. When our family, clan or nation is violently threatened we think we have a greater good on our side that overrides do not kill. Both the threat and the greater good may be real or imaginary but we’re built to survive, and survivors write the history books.
- Status