Secular Faith

[Bubba_Switzler]

But there are certain foundations of the West that make it what it is (like Christianity, the emphasis on human rights, the trust in reason, etc.). But even these things are being rejected.

Rejected in favor of what, exactly? There is, indeed, a competing worldview that one might reasonably call “faith” if not “religion” (e.g. Scientism).

 

[ThinkingSapien]

But there are certain foundations of the West that make it what it is (like Christianity, the emphasis on human rights, the trust in reason, etc.). But even these things are being rejected.

I’m not sure that’s true. There’s a bit of a history of not extending the same rights and protections or unequally applying laws and punishment.

I don’t want this discussion to descend into arguing over the meaning of words, so we should first discover what it means for a view to be religious, so that we can then determine what it means to be a secular view

Okay, if you have a definition to share feel free to do so. Though I often get the feeling people use the term “religion” in place if where a term of wider applicability (like “ideology” might be a better fit.

 

[Lucretius]

I’m not sure that’s true. There’s a bit of a history of not extending the same rights and protections or unequally applying laws and punishment.

I’m talking about as the Western ideal. The West was the one who started a science on rights. Eastern cultures, for example, didn’t have such a science.

Okay, if you have a definition to share feel free to do so. Though I often get the feeling people use the term “religion” in place if where a term of wider applicability (like “ideology” might be a better fit.

My argument is that religion is defined in our culture by an arbitrary list: religion is just Christianity, Judaism, Islam, Buddhism, etc. This list doesn’t tell me what a religion is. Quite honestly, most of these on the list disagree with what the purpose of religion actually is.

Just because I throw Rover and Whiskers in a category called “dog,” doesn’t tell me anything about how they are actually related. It might turn out Whiskers isn’t actaully the same thing as Rover.

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[mikekle]

I guess one could say thats the down side to free will, a certain number of people are going to choose to live the secular life and have no relationship with their creator…but that is their choice, and are free to exercise it.

 

[Lucretius]

I guess one could say thats the down side to free will, a certain number of people are going to choose to live the secular life and have no relationship with their creator…but that is their choice, and are free to exercise it.

In the pass, many who didn’t really believe would go through the religious motions due to habit, convention, and expectation, or just for the fun of it.

That these sort of people are now eschewing this inauthentic faith rings to me as a sort of spiritual advancement: at least they aren’t deceiving themselves and others.

Which is better: having no faith but thinking you do, or having no faith and knowing you don’t?

Christi pax,

Lucretius

 

[Bradski]

Though I often get the feeling people use the term “religion” in place if where a term of wider applicability (like “ideology” might be a better fit.

Religion is an organised belief system.

Why is Christianity losing ground?

I think that Catholics are losing ground because their beliefs are not seen to be applicable to most people. Contraception and attitudes to gay marriage are two of the areas where you are losing hearts and minds.

It wasn’t so long ago that hardly anyone knew someone who was gay. Most gay people kept it under wraps for obvious reasons. And it was easy to vilify them, make jokes, believe they were all perverts and so forth (I’ll include myself in those who did that).

Now we all know someone who is gay and the vast majority of us see nothing wrong with it. More and more people see less reason why two people of the same sex should not be able to marry. And the vast majority of those with no problem are younger people. And they will not be changing their minds as they grow older. That battle is already lost.

And I’ve just finished posting on a thread where the consensus was that using a condom when making love to your pregnant wife to prevent harm coming to your unborn child (if you live in an area where the zika virus is found) is…wait for it…evil. Not just against church teachings. Not just wrong. Not just an immoral act. But evil. And so another battle is lost.

 

[mikekle]

Religion is an organised belief system.

I think that Catholics are losing ground because their beliefs are not seen to be applicable to most people. Contraception and attitudes to gay marriage are two of the areas where you are losing hearts and minds.

It wasn’t so long ago that hardly anyone knew someone who was gay. Most gay people kept it under wraps for obvious reasons. And it was easy to vilify them, make jokes, believe they were all perverts and so forth (I’ll include myself in those who did that).

Now we all know someone who is gay and the vast majority of us see nothing wrong with it. More and more people see less reason why two people of the same sex should not be able to marry. And the vast majority of those with no problem are younger people. And they will not be changing their minds as they grow older. That battle is already lost.

And I’ve just finished posting on a thread where the consensus was that using a condom when making love to your pregnant wife to prevent harm coming to your unborn child (if you live in an area where the zika virus is found) is…wait for it…evil. Not just against church teachings. Not just wrong. Not just an immoral act. But evil. And so another battle is lost.

I agree, and its going to get worse, when this next generation grows up, they are going to have children, and teach them the same beliefs, then their kids kids will also grow up being taught these same things (who knows what the controversial issues of their times will be!!)…eventually I think it will reach a point when anything and everything is accepted and OK, even some things we would call criminal today.

But really, I guess we should not be surprised by this, the bible tells us things like this would happen in our world, and with Satan at the controls of this world, his grip will only get stronger, naturally, more and more evils will become accepted by society.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

I agree, and its going to get worse, when this next generation grows up, they are going to have children, and teach them the same beliefs, then their kids kids will also grow up being taught these same things (who knows what the controversial issues of their times will be!!)…eventually I think it will reach a point when anything and everything is accepted and OK, even some things we would call criminal today.

Perhaps this is the linear extrapolation of current trends but it neglects the reality of morality. Moral choices are not merely right or wrong in some abstract sense, they have real world consequences. As people choose one way instead of another the consequences shift with those choices.

The natural question, then, is what will be the conseqences of these various cultural changes and how might people in the future react to those consequences?

 

[HerCrazierHalf]

Perhaps this is the linear extrapolation of current trends but it neglects the reality of morality. Moral choices are not merely right or wrong in some abstract sense, they have real world consequences. As people choose one way instead of another the consequences shift with those choices.

The natural question, then, is what will be the conseqences of these various cultural changes and how might people in the future react to those consequences?

This presumes that the needs, wants, and stability of the society out weighs the needs and wants of the individual. But the ongoing shifts seem to be about the individual over society to an extent.

How do we know society and technology won’t continue to change to learn the impacts of these consequences? For example, fornication had the risk of disease and unsupported children who’s farther is unknown. Many of the diseases are curable or at least treatable (with side effects) instead of unstoppable deadly fertility destroying afflictions. Add to that DNA testing plus a robust government enforced child support system and the consequences aren’t eliminated but they are greatly reduced compared to a century ago.

 

[Bubba_Switzler]

This presumes that the needs, wants, and stability of the society out weighs the needs and wants of the individual. But the ongoing shifts seem to be about the individual over society to an extent.

No, it doesn’t. It presumes, rather, that the emotionalism of modern secularism is not taking into account certain realities that will make themselves felt in practice. (Nor is it the case that the secular faith represents a clear shift from soceity to individual.)

Here is an example: With the advent of no fault divorce there was a spike in broken marriages. A lot of people started to notice the consequences of this and marriage has strengthened among the upper classes but continued to collapse among the lower classes. There was no reversal in no fault divorce for the upper classes, these people were simply the first to recognize the bad deal that divorce was.

How do we know society and technology won’t continue to change to learn the impacts of these consequences? For example, fornication had the risk of disease and unsupported children who’s farther is unknown. Many of the diseases are curable or at least treatable (with side effects) instead of unstoppable deadly fertility destroying afflictions.

It is undoubtely true that technology has impacted the consequences of moral choices. This is one reason that appeals to tradition are of limited value.

But notice, also, that things can get worse too. AIDS made promiscuity a deadly lifestyle, particuarly for homosexuals. Other STDs have gotten much more dangerous in spite of medical advances.

Add to that DNA testing plus a robust government enforced child support system and the consequences aren’t eliminated but they are greatly reduced compared to a century ago.

This is one reason I have to laugh at assertions that secularism is more individualistic. In fact, many of the consequences of social change have been terrible for those practicing them and the “solution” has been to socialize the problems. Welfare dependency has grown with the sexual revolution.