The Liberal Agnostic Secular Humanist Four-Year Old

[Gottle_of_Geer]

Hi All,

I just finished reading Richard Dawkin’s “The God Delusion” where Dawkins raised an interesting issue that I had never thought about before. Dawkins has raised my conscioussness about the common practice of labelling children as Mulsim, Jewish, Christian, or Hindu based on the religion of their parents. But children are too young to have made up their minds about their religious beliefs. Dawkins points out that there is really no such thing as a Christian child, and we should all wince upon hearing such labels as we would if we heard children being labelled according to their parent’s beliefs as liberal or conservative children, agnostic or secular humanist children, and capitalist or marxist children.

What do you think?

Best,
Leela

I would question his knowledge of children ​

 

[Leela]

I would question his knowledge of children ​

That’s a common tactic employed against Dawkins. He’s an expert in biology so therefore he must not know anything about anything else. As usual, it is a tactic used to avoid engaging his arguments. Besides pointing out that Dawkins is not an expert on children, which is irrelevant to the issue, what do you think about whether children can have religious beliefs and rightly be called Christians? Why would we call children of Muslim parents, Muslim, while we would never call children of Republican parents, Republican?

 

[tomarin]

That’s a common tactic employed against Dawkins. He’s an expert in biology so therefore he must not know anything about anything else. As usual, it is a tactic used to avoid engaging his arguments. Besides pointing out that Dawkins is not an expert on children, which is irrelevant to the issue, what do you think about whether children can have religious beliefs and rightly be called Christians? Why would we call children of Muslim parents, Muslim, while we would never call children of Republican parents, Republican?

Perhaps you misread Gottle’s comment and he was referring to the often-heard assertion by religious people that “children are natural believers” (and the corresponding view that that points naturally to the existence of God)? If that’s what he meant it would be a rebuttal of sorts to Dawkins and so relevant to the conversation.

I’m not sure I’m convinced that children are natural believers. I have a 3-year old son and I’ve been watching him very closely for evidence one way or the other (too early to tell). But if they are then Dawkins is wrong.

 

[PRmerger]

Besides pointing out that Dawkins is not an expert on children, which is irrelevant to the issue, what do you think about whether children can have religious beliefs and rightly be called Christians? Why would we call children of Muslim parents, Muslim, while we would never call children of Republican parents, Republican?

Christian children, who are baptized, are called Christians not because of their understanding of theology, but because they have become members of Christ’s family. Yes, indeed, they can rightly be called Christians!!

In fact, I believe the same could be said for male Jewish infants. They are Jewish by virtue of their circumcision. Again, it says nothing about their profession of belief. That comes later.

Not sure about Islam. Does anyone know if there’s a parallel to Baptism in Islam?

 

[CradleCath]

Not any more. Now, as an adult, he just accepts 2+2=4.

:dancing:

I know a Mother who’s about 40 yrs. old now, & attends a Baptist Church on Christmas & Easter. She told me, when her first child was born, that she would not bring him up in ANY faith, that he should be able to choose which faith he wanted to follow…if any… when he was older. I, innocently asked her if she felt the same way about schooling. Would she let him decide which school he would attend…IF ANY…when he was older.
She had no answer. Now, he is 13 yrs. old & is taken to the Baptist Church on Christmas & Easter. He has no where to turn when things are not good in his life. He has no compass, he has no God. It is a pitiful thing to see.

 

[Leela]

Christian children, who are baptized, are called Christians not because of their understanding of theology, but because they have become members of Christ’s family. Yes, indeed, they can rightly be called Christians!!

Dawkins is baptized. Is he a Christian?

 

[ricmat]

That’s a shame. It would be better for him to me able to think mathematically.

But I’ll bet that you believe a lot of things that you haven’t personally worked out as being true. We all do this. There’s a bumper sticker out which says “Question Everything” (or something similar). That’s an idea that just doesn’t work in the real world. Frankly, we sometimes need to put our faith in what others tell us…there just isn’t time to figure out “everything” for ouselves.

 

[ricmat]

Dawkins is baptized. Is he a Christian?

If properly baptized, he is a Christian. But you need to remember that there are practicing Christians, and non-practicing Christians. There are Christians who are not in communion with the Church, or are in varying degrees of non-complete communion with the Church. There are Christians who actively promote non-Christian ideas.

He could say “I’m not a Christian.” and I think most people here would not argue with him (if for no other reason that it would be embarrassing for Christians to say that he’s one of ours.) Sort of like “the American Taliban” guy. Yup, he’s an American citizen.

 

[Leela]

But I’ll bet that you believe a lot of things that you haven’t personally worked out as being true. We all do this. There’s a bumper sticker out which says “Question Everything” (or something similar). That’s an idea that just doesn’t work in the real world. Frankly, we sometimes need to put our faith in what others tell us…there just isn’t time to figure out “everything” for ourselves.

What you are describing is part of what I mean by “we need to teach our children to think rather than what to think.” Part of learning how to think is learning how to decide when to take other’s word for it and when not to, what sources are reliable and what are not.

 

[ricmat]

What you are describing is part of what I mean by “we need to teach our children to think rather than what to think.” Part of learning how to think is learning how to decide when to take other’s word for it and when not to, what sources are reliable and what are not.

I actually agree with you. I was going to say the same thing, but got lazy and didn’t type it in

 

[Leela]

If properly baptized, he is a Christian. But you need to remember that there are practicing Christians, and non-practicing Christians. There are Christians who are not in communion with the Church, or are in varying degrees of non-complete communion with the Church. There are Christians who actively promote non-Christian ideas.

He could say “I’m not a Christian.” and I think most people here would not argue with him (if for no other reason that it would be embarrassing for Christians to say that he’s one of ours.) Sort of like “the American Taliban” guy. Yup, he’s an American citizen.

If Dawkins is a Christian solely on the basis of having been baptized as a baby, then it doesn’t seem to mean much to say that anyone is a Christian. I think most people do not see it as you do even if that is what the Catholic Church teaches.

If a person who has been baptized converts to a different religion, is she still a Christian? Once a Christian always a Christian? Do others agree?

 

[PRmerger]

Dawkins is baptized. Is he a Christian?

If he was baptized with water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, then he’s a baptized Christian. (Some sects, like Mormons and JWs, have what we consider non-valid baptisms). He became a “new creature”.

So when he was 4, he was a Christian, assuming the above.

When he rejected Christ, he rejects Christianity. But, the Good News is Christ is waiting with open arms for him to return!! And, he is still my brother in Christ, whether he likes it or not!

What about you, Leela–were you baptized?

 

[ricmat]

If Dawkins is a Christian solely on the basis of having been baptized as a baby, then it doesn’t seem to mean much to say that anyone is a Christian.

Saying you’re a Christian is meaningless unless you follow through on the beliefs. Technically, baptism “claims you for Christ”, and provides grace to help you find God (usually later in life if baptized as an infant). But it doesn’t force anyone to behave in a good way since we still have free will.

 

[ricmat]

If a person who has been baptized converts to a different religion, is she still a Christian? Once a Christian always a Christian? Do others agree?

If baptized, you have been claimed for Christ - with a permanent imprint on your soul, and admitted into a covenant with God. Even if one loses one’s way afterwards.

 

[Leela]

If he was baptized with water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit, then he’s a baptized Christian. (Some sects, like Mormons and JWs, have what we consider non-valid baptisms). He became a “new creature”.

So when he was 4, he was a Christian, assuming the above.

When he rejected Christ, he rejects Christianity. But, the Good News is Christ is waiting with open arms for him to return!! And, he is still my brother in Christ, whether he likes it or not!

What about you, Leela–were you baptized?

Yes, I was baptized as a baby, but I have not been a Christian since high school.

So we seem to agree that Dawkins is not a Christian because he does not believe that Jesus is God. But you say he was a Christian when he was 4 even though he could make no sense of the statement “Jesus is God” at the time or at least when he was 1 or 2. I’m at a loss as to how someone who does not even believe in God can be thought of as a Christian.

A child of Democrats would not be thought of as a Democrat because she has not reached an age where she could decide what to believe. Why would we call Dawkins a Christian when he was not old enough to decide what he believed? In both cases we should recognize that at some point he will be old enough to make up his mind about such things, and before that we should not project his parent’s views on him. There is a difference between “a child of Christian parents” and a “Christian child.” One of them does not exist.

 

[PRmerger]

Saying you’re a Christian is meaningless unless you follow through on the beliefs. Technically, baptism “claims you for Christ”, and provides grace to help you find God (usually later in life if baptized as an infant). But it doesn’t force anyone to behave in a good way since we still have free will.

Just to add to your well-written post: A 4yr old baptized Christian is different from a 40 yr old baptized Christian–while both are claimed by Christ, the 40 yr old baptized Christian also has the responsibility to continue into the life of faith. As the Catechism says, “faith must grow *after *Baptism” CCC 1254

 

[PRmerger]

So we seem to agree that Dawkins is not a Christian because he does not believe that Jesus is God. But you say he was a Christian when he was 4 even though he could make no sense of the statement “Jesus is God” at the time or at least when he was 1 or 2. I’m at a loss as to how someone who does not even believe in God can be thought of as a Christian.

What exactly do you mean by a Christian? Your definition seems to differ from the Church’s.

In one sense, being a Christian is someone who has been claimed by Christ, is a member of His Body, and is a partaker of the divine nature. YOU are a Christian in this sense. A baptized 4 yr old is a Christian in this sense.

In another sense, Christians must love Christ with their heart, mind and soul. So anyone who rejects Christ is not a Christian in this sense. You are NOT a Christian in this sense. A 4 yr old is probably a Christian in this sense, as she can love Christ to the best of her 4 yr old sensibilities. And, as a mommy of 4 children, I can tell you that all of my daughters loved their Lord to the best of their 4 yr old sensibilities.

Why would we call Dawkins a Christian when he was not old enough to decide what he believed?

Because Dawkins is a Christian in the same way that a baptized 4 yr old is a Christian. (I didn’t realize how much enjoyment I’d get out of comparing Dawkins to a 4 yr old! )

 

[Leela]

What exactly do you mean by a Christian? Your definition seems to differ from the Church’s.

In one sense, being a Christian is someone who has been claimed by Christ, is a member of His Body, and is a partaker of the divine nature. YOU are a Christian in this sense. A baptized 4 yr old is a Christian in this sense.

In another sense, Christians must love Christ with their heart, mind and soul. So anyone who rejects Christ is not a Christian in this sense. You are NOT a Christian in this sense. A 4 yr old is probably a Christian in this sense, as she can love Christ to the best of her 4 yr old sensibilities. And, as a mommy of 4 children, I can tell you that all of my daughters loved their Lord to the best of their 4 yr old sensibilities.

Because Dawkins is a Christian in the same way that a baptized 4 yr old is a Christian. (I didn’t realize how much enjoyment I’d get out of comparing Dawkins to a 4 yr old! )

So a four year old is just as much a Christian as Richard Dawkins is. That much makes sense to me.

I think people generally view Christians as those who hold certain beliefs.

 

[PRmerger]

So a four year old is just as much a Christian as Richard Dawkins is. That much makes sense to me.

Indeed.

I think people generally view Christians as those who hold certain beliefs.

In one sense, yes.

In the other sense, my Church is very clear that once you’re baptized you’re a Christian; perhaps that’s why you were attracted to the CAF–your baptism gave you a share in the “common priesthood of all believers”.

 

[miguel]

That’s a common tactic employed against Dawkins. He’s an expert in biology so therefore he must not know anything about anything else. As usual, it is a tactic used to avoid engaging his arguments.

Avoiding his arguements isn’t the problem. Do you talk to people who make a point of insulting you? “The God Delusion” is insulting. Calling the Pope “stupid” is insulting. He’s not interested in a conversation with believers.