The Confusion of Catholicism

[RebeccaJ]

Everyone is biased. LOL!

I’m not an atheist. Welcome to the conversation.

Yes, I specifically agree with you. The ambiguity of both Catholicism and Atheism are not satisfactory for many people, and I think they turn to hate to try to build an ego for themselves in opposition to what they reject.

Indeed, we are.

Thanks for the welcome but I’m just dropping by. Just felt like commenting on your stereotyping.


BTW I was a right and proper nihilist which is an absolute view of everything in the negative. I was drawn to Catholicism because of its opposite claims of something rather than nothing. I define my Catholicism in terms of the reality of a Person. Discipleship, in the acceptance of the ultimate reality of Jesus Christ. I certainly am capable of a negative existence paradigm! But I choose to walk in the light.

God bless you on your journey and may His light forever shine on your face.

 

[SyroMalankara]

Do you think that “free will” is a good enough explanation for this? Could you explain why you find it to be satisfactory?

You and I make choices, many times knowing they hurt other people and violate divine commands. This choice leads to a mindset, which can lead to a hardening of position, that even the hurt and the commands are not sins and you are not violating them. This leads to estrangement from God’s love. That choice is each person’s to make.

You’re right, my mind is basically closed on the subject of eternal hell. I am not willing to engage in a debate about it, because I don’t think it will benefit anyone.

Then why bring it up?

I have debated about it extensively on this forum, feel free to read my old posts. I have a strong suspicion that I will be banned if I make another thread about it, and besides that my mind is made up. I believe I have examined the evidence well enough at this point, and I don’t believe in it. If you have some extraordinary evidence, I’m willing to examine it, but please do PM it to me rather than derail this thread.

Any Catholic can counter your position with “I’m convinced Catholicism is right, my mind is made up” now don’t talk about that but keep discussing…

 

[PRmerger]

…exactly…

No. PC.

I think you don’t even understand what you’re saying.

You are claiming that Catholicism is ambiguous, yet you are also claiming things are “soooo Catholic”.

This tells me that what you reject is more an act of the Will rather than an act of the Intellect.

For some reason there is a visceral rejection to Catholicism, and you are using intellectual ideology as a miasma.

This is NOT a good paradigm by which to evaluate truth.

 

[PRmerger]

Um, yes you did. Or, did you have a different meaning for “desuetude?” I didn’t just slowly drift away or let it slide due to disuse.

Of course not! I am excommunicated. If only they would approve my official excommunication, then I wouldn’t have to go to mass anymore.

I’m a pragmatic person. I am fairly certain Catholicism isn’t true, but just in case, I’d rather not rack up tons of sins. I mean, I heard that my eternal torture will be a little bit less awful if I don’t sin so much by not going to mass.

Are you receiving the Eucharist?

 

[PRmerger]

Um, yes you did. Or, did you have a different meaning for “desuetude?” I didn’t just slowly drift away or let it slide due to disuse.

Friend, surely you know that there are more Catholics in the pews at Mass in a state of oblivion than there are streetcorner churches springing up.

So you could certainly be going to Mass in a state of desuetude and I wouldn’t know.

So, no, I didn’t give a thought to your going to Mass.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

No. PC.

I think you don’t even understand what you’re saying.

You are claiming that Catholicism is ambiguous, yet you are also claiming things are “soooo Catholic”.

This tells me that what you reject is more an act of the Will rather than an act of the Intellect.

For some reason there is a visceral rejection to Catholicism, and you are using intellectual ideology as a miasma.

This is NOT a good paradigm by which to evaluate truth.

PRmerger, you specifically go around telling people “that’s Catholic ” This is one of your characteristic behaviors. I am poking fun. OK?

Also, I think it is true that a certain subset of Catholics believe that God desires them to do things that are non-intuitive and disagreeable. I think it is a residual affect from childhood. For instance, it is well known that children think “Mommy is mean” because she says “no.” I think that some Catholics carry this impression of “God is mean” because he says “no” into adulthood, and develop a spiritual sense that if something denies our natural instincts, it is Godly. That’s all.

I have no idea what “all Catholics” are like. That’s part of my point.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Are you receiving the Eucharist?

Of course not, and I haven’t for years. Once I became convinced it was an act of blasphemy of course I immediately ceased. I’m not sure I ever desired to receive communion, since I always had doubts about it, but I received out of a misplaced desire to obey God. Once I figured out that the version of the Catholic Church I was familiar with at the time was NOT GOD, it became clear.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Friend, surely you know that there are more Catholics in the pews at Mass in a state of oblivion than there are streetcorner churches springing up.

So you could certainly be going to Mass in a state of desuetude and I wouldn’t know.

So, no, I didn’t give a thought to your going to Mass.

Such a harsh judgment of your fellow church-goers! With mass attendance rates below 10%, I’d rather suspect that the people there are among the most fervent believers. Except me of course!

 

[PRmerger]

No. PC.

I think you don’t even understand what you’re saying.

You are claiming that Catholicism is ambiguous, yet you are also claiming things are “soooo Catholic”.

This tells me that what you reject is more an act of the Will rather than an act of the Intellect.

For some reason there is a visceral rejection to Catholicism, and you are using intellectual ideology as a miasma.

This is NOT a good paradigm by which to evaluate truth.

How strange…as I’m on CAFs, going about my day, I’m also listening to a Youtube discussion with Dr. Peter Kreeft posted by apologist Mark Shea on Facebook.

Guess what I just heard: “that’s not a fault of the intellect, that’s a fault of the will”. To ignore something is an act of the will that makes the intellect not look at the truth that it knows is there but is…unwelcome.

#notacoincidence

 

[Kevin12]

I don’t think your premise that CAF is a good sample of Catholicism even in the U.S. is correct. The fact is that an online forum is naturally conducive to sectarianism and judgment, and the people who seek this place out are probably not representative of, say, average Catholic parents who don’t spend much time on the net (like my dad, for instance). This place is also home to a vastly disproportionate number of tradtionalists,—like, trads probably represent maybe 1-2% of U.S. but 10-20% of this forum— who are particularly fixated on the deciding “who isn’t really a Catholic” and often seek out threads that seem to have related topics so they can tell people about it.

 

[PRmerger]

Such a harsh judgment of your fellow church-goers!

Harsh doesn’t equate to untrue.

With mass attendance rates below 10%, I’d rather suspect that the people there are among the most fervent believers. Except me of course!

Most people are there for the same reason you are: they are hedging their bets.

 

[guanophore]

It seems that this particular sub-forum has become a place of open hostility toward atheism.

I have not been on the threads much lately, so I have not seen this hatefulness. It is against the forum rules here, so if you see any such post, you should use the little exclamation point on the top right to notify the mods.

I generally avoid debating with atheists because so many of them seem to be cynical, so it isn’t any fun for me, but also because I find such a world view so pitiful.

Before proceeding, I would like to clarify that I am an agnostic theist. I do have a personal history of hating Catholicism, but I am trying to get over it to the best of my ability. I have stated my personal bias ahead of time; hopefully this is a sufficient disclosure.

Here is my theory about why so many people hate and fear atheism/atheists:[/qu ote]

Perhaps my response is unusual. I neither hate nor fear, but feel sorry for them. My Catholic faith is what organizes and gives meaning to my life and when I imagine life without that, it is very sad.

1: The essence of what it means to be a Catholic is ambiguous and confusing.

There doesn’t seem to be any consensus on what it means to be a true Catholic. This website should be proof enough, but evidence abounds! Confusion reigns. Because of this, those who consider themselves Catholic and attempt to build their identities upon that idea are building on an ambiguous and shifting core. They cannot find a solid, rich, and nutrient-filled soil for them to root their egos.

It is true that there are a number of poorly catechized Catholics. I used to be one myself. But it is an error to equate persons who don’t know their faith with a lack of cohesion in the faith. First of all, our faith is not based on “consensus” but upon the teachings of Christ, which are not ambiguous or confusing. Jesus wanted us to know everything needed to get us to heaven,and He has revealed it through His teachings, and through His One Body, ,the Church.

I do agree, however, that building one’s identity on somoething that is ambiguous and shifting is ulitimately defeating. Catholics who do not learn their faith and practice it are, indeed, lacking roots in the solid, rich, and nutrient filled soil provided to us by Christ.

2: **Without a strong and clear identity, a negative definition emerges.**

Catholics would say that this is the result of concupiscence.

Because Catholics don’t know who they are, and consequently are unable to love themselves, they must turn outward to define what they are not.

They hate the other, in order to give the ego something firm to grasp. Catholics are against such and such, they oppose so and so. Because they can’t agree, or even understand what they love they turn to hatred and fear in order to define themselves.

It is curious, but as I was reading this, I realized it sounded to me much like how I think about Protestantism. Protestants began by defining themselves against the Catholics, and continue to be defined by which parts, and how much of the Catholic faith they reject. You are right that it does result in a lot of shifting sand, and it is an identity built upon what is rejected.

Fortunately Catholics do not need to find themselves in this position, since the Jesus has revealed all that we need to embrace (as opposed to reject) to the Church. We believe that there has been a “once for all” divine deposit of faith that includes the revelation by God of himself in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

I believe that this same dynamic drives atheism. Of course atheists can’t agree on what to believe or who they are. There is no widespread agreement or consensus. Rather, there is a mutual disdain and hatred of religion and “blind faith.”

I don’t know about “hatred” but I can certainly agree that I have disdain as well for blind faith, and fundamentalism. The more I hear about terrorist activity, though, the more my hatred of fundamentalism grows.

Simply not believing in God or gods is insufficient to ground one’s ego. We need a mission, a purpose, a clear vision of ourselves (whether it is illusory doesn’t matter).

I can agree with this wholeheartedly. Of course, Catholics believe that God created us this way, so that He could HImself fulfill our need for these things in the context of our relationship with him.

Atheism and Catholicism are both ambiguous and open-ended. Because of this, each side turns to the invigorating clarity of hatred.

This is a mystery to me, since I do not find Catholicism ambiguous. I am not sure what you mean by 'open ended" so I can’t speak to that. I do agree, however that a lack of self identity does lend itself to a sense of feeling “lost” and the subsequent development of hatefulness.

I guess I have a fundamental disrespect of atheism because I am pursuaded that an atheist must be dishonest to embrace such a position. Since I believe God has revealed Himself to every human soul,and we are all made in HIs image and likeness, it seems to me that an atheist must reject the truth.

What do you think? Is this a plausible theory? Why or why not?

Also, I have to give credit to J.P. Sartre. I am adapting his theory of hatred in Réflexions sur la question juive

to this situation of internet-based hatred.

I think that hatred is based in ignorance and lack of forgiveness.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

You and I make choices, many times knowing they hurt other people and violate divine commands. This choice leads to a mindset, which can lead to a hardening of position, that even the hurt and the commands are not sins and you are not violating them. This leads to estrangement from God’s love. That choice is each person’s to make.

OK so, which groups or subgroups of Christians are/were estranged from God’s love, and how can I know that you know? We’re trying to answer my thesis: that the mutual hatred we see among Christians/Catholics and atheists/believers is a product of hate grasping toward a more defined ego. I understand you as saying “free will” is a better explanation. Is that right?

Then why bring it up?

Any Catholic can counter your position with “I’m convinced Catholicism is right, my mind is made up” now don’t talk about that but keep discussing…

I brought it up because PRMerger suspects my rejection of Catholicism is due to emotion rather than or even against reason. I brought up an example of a doctrine that makes me emotionally angry. I was trying to give her an answer and find some common ground.

We’re not discussing whether Catholicism is true or false, but if my thesis in post #1 is good not not. Does it explain some observed behaviors well enough? If you say no, that’s great! Let’s talk about why…

 

[PumpkinCookie]

I don’t think your premise that CAF is a good sample of Catholicism even in the U.S. is correct. The fact is that an online forum is naturally conducive to sectarianism and judgment, and the people who seek this place out are probably not representative of, say, average Catholic parents who don’t spend much time on the net (like my dad, for instance). This place is also home to a vastly disproportionate number of tradtionalists,—like, trads probably represent maybe 1-2% of U.S. but 10-20% of this forum— who are particularly fixated on the deciding “who isn’t really a Catholic” and often seek out threads that seem to have related topics so they can tell people about it.

Good point! The real life Catholics in my family and by acquaintance are very dissimilar to online apologetic warriors.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Harsh doesn’t equate to untrue.

Most people are there for the same reason you are: they are hedging their bets.

Oh gosh, another harsh judgment! I am perfectly willing to admit that I am cowardly and pragmatic, but it seems wrong to accuse others of the same. How could either of us know?

Although, as time has gone on, I’m not there as a hedge anymore. I’m there for my family as my main purpose at this point. I hope that God will not judge me harshly for accompanying my family. I don’t participate or anything, but sometimes I think it is wrong to even be there. I hope not!

 

[guanophore]

Um, yes you did. Or, did you have a different meaning for “desuetude?” I didn’t just slowly drift away or let it slide due to disuse.

Of course not! I am excommunicated. If only they would approve my official excommunication, then I wouldn’t have to go to mass anymore.

I’m a pragmatic person. I am fairly certain Catholicism isn’t true, but just in case, I’d rather not rack up tons of sins. I mean, I heard that my eternal torture will be a little bit less awful if I don’t sin so much by not going to mass.

Excommunicating oneself is entirely sufficient.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latae_sententiae

You don’t need to wait for something 'official" it has already been made official.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

Excommunicating oneself is entirely sufficient.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latae_sententiae

You don’t need to wait for something 'official" it has already been made official.

The self-excommunication doesn’t release one from the obligation to attend mass, donate money, etc. It does release me from the obligation to receive communion once per year.

 

[guanophore]

No. PC.

I think you don’t even understand what you’re saying.

You are claiming that Catholicism is ambiguous, yet you are also claiming things are “soooo Catholic”.

This tells me that what you reject is more an act of the Will rather than an act of the Intellect.

For some reason there is a visceral rejection to Catholicism, and you are using intellectual ideology as a miasma.

This is NOT a good paradigm by which to evaluate truth.

 

[guanophore]

PRmerger, you specifically go around telling people "that's Catholic :thumbsup:" This is one of your characteristic behaviors. I am poking fun. OK?

It is a good idea to do this, since many people (often Protestants) have been very misinformed about what “Catholic” is, and need to be informed.

Also, I think it is true that a certain subset of Catholics believe that God desires them to do things that are non-intuitive and disagreeable.

This seems like an absurd notion. It presupposes that what is write and wrong is somehow consistent with human “intuition”. Obedience involves compliance to what may be non-intuitive because our intuition is not the source of eternal truth.

The fact that we must do things that are disagreable is a reflection of our human nature. We are not oriented toward having joy in doing all that is right and good.

I think it is a residual affect from childhood. For instance, it is well known that children think “Mommy is mean” because she says “no.”

Such a statement presupposes that, if a Catholic must do something non-intuitive or disagreeable, it one has a childlike concept of God and thinks that God is “mean”. This in itself seems to be a childlike presuposition!

I think that some Catholics carry this impression of “God is mean” because he says “no” into adulthood, and develop a spiritual sense that if something denies our natural instincts, it is Godly. That’s all.

I have no idea what “all Catholics” are like. That’s part of my point.

I do agree that developing an attitude that, when something denies our natural instincts it is Godly is childlike. I find nothing “spiritual” about it.

I think people carry an immature perspective no matter what their faith pursuasion.

 

[PumpkinCookie]

I have not been on the threads much lately, so I have not seen this hatefulness. It is against the forum rules here, so if you see any such post, you should use the little exclamation point on the top right to notify the mods.

I generally avoid debating with atheists because so many of them seem to be cynical, so it isn’t any fun for me, but also because I find such a world view so pitiful.

Perhaps my response is unusual. I neither hate nor fear, but feel sorry for them. My Catholic faith is what organizes and gives meaning to my life and when I imagine life without that, it is very sad.

Well, there you go! You’re not a hater. That’s good! Pity is an appropriate response when you feel like others are deprived of something awesome. It makes sense.

It is true that there are a number of poorly catechized Catholics. I used to be one myself. But it is an error to equate persons who don’t know their faith with a lack of cohesion in the faith. First of all, our faith is not based on “consensus” but upon the teachings of Christ, which are not ambiguous or confusing. Jesus wanted us to know everything needed to get us to heaven,and He has revealed it through His teachings, and through His One Body, ,the Church.

I do agree, however, that building one’s identity on somoething that is ambiguous and shifting is ulitimately defeating. Catholics who do not learn their faith and practice it are, indeed, lacking roots in the solid, rich, and nutrient filled soil provided to us by Christ.

OK, with you. I am willing to entertain your “poor catechesis” hypothesis.

Catholics would say that this is the result of concupiscence.

It is curious, but as I was reading this, I realized it sounded to me much like how I think about Protestantism. Protestants began by defining themselves against the Catholics, and continue to be defined by which parts, and how much of the Catholic faith they reject. You are right that it does result in a lot of shifting sand, and it is an identity built upon what is rejected.

Fortunately Catholics do not need to find themselves in this position, since the Jesus has revealed all that we need to embrace (as opposed to reject) to the Church. We believe that there has been a “once for all” divine deposit of faith that includes the revelation by God of himself in Sacred Scripture and Sacred Tradition.

Yup, but I would say both the various forms of Catholicism and Protestantism are children of the same period of confusion in the 4th century. The central problem is that it isn’t so easy to determine the contents of “the one true faith” as the people who believe they have uncovered the contents think! If it were easy, people wouldn’t disagree. You say concupiscence, I say ambiguity. Very difficult to determine whether this kind of disagreement is endemic to all human affairs (which would be implied by concupiscence) or whether it is specific to religious belief or ideology in general.

I don’t know about “hatred” but I can certainly agree that I have disdain as well for blind faith, and fundamentalism. The more I hear about terrorist activity, though, the more my hatred of fundamentalism grows.

I can agree with this wholeheartedly. Of course, Catholics believe that God created us this way, so that He could HImself fulfill our need for these things in the context of our relationship with him.

This is a mystery to me, since I do not find Catholicism ambiguous. I am not sure what you mean by 'open ended" so I can’t speak to that. I do agree, however that a lack of self identity does lend itself to a sense of feeling “lost” and the subsequent development of hatefulness.

I guess I have a fundamental disrespect of atheism because I am pursuaded that an atheist must be dishonest to embrace such a position. Since I believe God has revealed Himself to every human soul,and we are all made in HIs image and likeness, it seems to me that an atheist must reject the truth.

I think that hatred is based in ignorance and lack of forgiveness.

Interesting! See, this seems like a totally honest answer to me. Thank you.

I think Islamic fundamentalists terrorists are dismayed that Allah does not rule the entire world yet. It is prophesied that Allah will conquer and the entire world will submit. This hasn’t happened, so I think it undermines the faith of many Muslims who wish for a clear-cut fulfillment of prophecy.

Also, I think both believers and atheists suspect each other of self-delusion or outright deception. Or, stupidity. I’ve seen the accusations fly from both sides. Neither side wants to entertain the thought that the answer is ambiguous though. Because, that doesn’t seem so satisfying to our egos. Maybe you are right though. I will think about it some more.