Con men are not foreign to our faith, but should be exposed for what they are and opposed when possible.
Well, there’s a statement that makes Catholicism stand tall in my eyes, if there ever was one.
TS, I suspect that a lot of converts kept their biblical literalist hermeneutic wrapped in a waterproof bundle on their backs as they “swam the Tiber.” They are coming into the Church without realizing that we Catholics have been here for ages, and that we don’t carry that same literalist hermeneutic on our backs.
I’m sure that’s the case. I think I meant that, but also something … wider by “fundamentalist”, though, something that goes beyond just a rigid literalist biblical hermeneutic. There’s a common kind of foundationalism and brittleness that spans across a lot more than just the role and status of scripture. Catholics, generally, are much more flexible in their thinking (yes, while being careful not to run afoul of catechetical boundaries), so the kinds of simplistic and polar thinking on all sorts of issues maybe just stands out more here, in contrast.
I agree, but it does not help matters when the RCC states in its dogma that interpretation of creation and evolution is up to the individual. From my point of view, the RCC is welcoming ID and creationist supporters with open arms and does not try to dispel these erroneous scientific and historical claims. These “fundamentalists” can find a comfortable home in the RCC as it presently describes dogma around creation and evolution.
Yes, and really, this is one thing that condemns the Catholic Church in my eyes. If I could get over the basic doubt that there was warrant for God’s existence in the first place, or that the Gospel claims were reasonable to accept (I could not, as it turns out, after embracing them for years and years), the fact that even the RCC was impotent in the face of proudly ignorant and anti-reasoning creationism really just made it academic.
The Catholic Church has a lot more reasonable stance toward science and evolution than Evangelical Protestantism, but it too – see here, often enough – suffers foolishness nonsense, proud ignorance that scolds in its name. If the Catholic God and his church on earth cannot even ward off young earth creationists and their claims, that’s one anemic, impotent, ambivalent God, I’d say.
In part I supposed that Catholicism was a bit of relief from that craziness, and for a while it actually kept me leaning toward RCIA, just because I didn’t want to bail on the whole deal just because I was surprised to find Catholicism both OK with creationism and unable to fend off the claims of creationism in any case.
In the end, that was not dispositive. I really just could not justify the belief in God along any line of thinking. But if there’s ever moments where I doubt and wonder, a little dose of the creationists/fundamentalists here or elsewhere is like strong smelling salts that snap me back to my senses. I come back to the basis for believing God exists, but a little creationism is good to remind one where all that leads, and what one cannot dismiss or reject, if Christianity is true.
-TS
