I enjoy the idea of the blogosphere being a series of drive-by arguments. I can read something, then write a post on it. Someone can read that, it can inform their post, people comment and discussion starts to happen.
Shane’s blog has lain dormant for the past week or so, but the comments keep flowing in on his post questioning Catholicism. The last poster brought up something that sent me off in its complete hypocrisy:
“But be careful you don’t pick and choose what you want in your religion”
I’m sorry, what? Isn’t that exactly what Christianity is? Throughout the ages, right from its founding that’s been the basis of the entire religion. To Paraphrase a bit…
“Hey, Jesus, this Judaism thing isn’t working out for us, how about a new covenant?”
“You know what, pork’s pretty tasty, and our dietary habits are causing a bit of trouble with the Gentiles, I bet it’s not that unclean, go ahead and eat anything from the meat market.” – Paul
“Hey guys, lets all get together and decide what’s going to be in the Bible and what to throw out” - The Council of Nicea
“Just hang on a minute, (Ein minuten, bitte) you know what, we don’t need all these sacraments, the Church is pretty corrupt. Also, mass in the vernacular would be a good idea, here’s a few other theses and I’ll just nail them up here” – Martin Luther
“Hey you know what, that guy has some good points, we should evaluate ourselves a bit” – The counter-reformation
And so on.
A previous poster mentioned Papal infallibility. Just cause he’s got the biggest hat and a suped up golf cart doesn’t mean the Pope is a conduit to God. The church can be wrong. Remember, the church is made of men, all of whom are human, and therefore imperfect. Dissent is part of the free will that was mentioned earlier as divinely given, and should be encouraged, not looked upon with disdain and fear. Defending arguments with “Because it’s God’s will” means you’re not thinking for yourself, or maybe even at all. You’re taking what one person said as gospel. Something that’s not written in any gospel you can read to verify (written gospels that may have been “divinely inspired” were later edited by men).
Who are you to tell anyone that they can’t support the rights of people to have an abortion, or the freedom to love each other regardless of gender and call themselves Catholic? By trying to litigate these things based on religion, making them illegal in the eyes of a secular government you are suppressing their religious freedom, the free will given to these people by your God and imposing your own. How can anyone do that and call themselves Christian?
Documancy
5 hours ago
7 comments:
"But be careful you don't pick and choose what you want in your religion"
I actually have to agree with this statement. There are two quotes that don't fit in with my view of your argument. Martin Luther chose what he liked about religion and then changed it into his own religion, thus Luthern was born. The Council of Nicea was a group of people who were "updating" per se what should and shouldn't be in the Bible, thus throwing out books and adding new ones in, but this was a collective decision of a group of people, not the individual.
I feel like I can't pick and choose what I want in my religion, cause if I did, then it wouldn't be Catholicism. It would be Shane-ism, or something silly like that. There was another comment in my blog (which I was really surprised to see how many actually commented) that another person said something like they chose Catholicism because it fit them best. I'm the same way (oh no, I feel another blog coming on) and because I'm choosing Catholicism, I have to deal with the parts of it that I don't think are right and deal with it the best I can. It's one of the hardships of being religious and it shows exactly how devout you are.
Am I going to stand idle about the things I don't like or change it? If I change it, am I really in the same religion? Annoying questions but they are questions nonetheless that pop up to haunt everyone.
One more thing: "defending arguments with “Because it’s God’s will” means you’re not thinking for yourself, or maybe even at all" is a good statement, but its when people start bringing up reasons for why its God's will, then I think its a good enough statement and they are thinking.
Long comment is long...
Also the guy above your latest comment deleted it so I never got a chance to read it. >.>;;
the comment immediately preceding mine was from me as well. I was talking about the Anonymous post and the one above it by Andie.
Also, friend you jumped on the part of my post that was intended as entertainment and completely ignored the point of my posting, re-read that last paragraph and get back to me.
Though it may be that I never plan to have homosexual relations, or an abortion for that matter, (lacking a uterus and all) doesn't give me a reason to impose my will or the will of my church on anyone else.
I'm not asking you to pick and choose from the teachings of the church, but just acknowledge the hypocrisy in the statement that started all of this. Things change because people and times change, the church is a living organism and its interpretations of Christ's teachings have evolved over time - those who hold the power in the church picking and choosing what to take and what to throw out.
Also, forgive me if I'm wrong, but is religion supposed to be a hardship? can devotion be measured in introspective suffering and torment? I can see why a catholic would agree with your statement, it would make us the most devout group in the world!
Leviticus 19:18 Thou shalt not avenge, nor bear any grudge against the children of thy people, but thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself: I am the LORD.
This is a statement I think far too many Christians forget about. And last time I checked, Jesus wasn't just hanging out with the clean-cut, goody two shoes people. If the point of Christianity is to strive to be more like Christ, doesn't that include accepting all people?
In the case of the statement you write about, maybe it's not picking and choosing which parts to follow, maybe it's picking which is better when two parts contradict themselves...
Just a thought.
"because I'm choosing Catholicism, I have to deal with the parts of it that I don't think are right and deal with it the best I can"
If you don't think they are right, do you truly believe in that part of Catholicism? You profess to have faith that lines up with the central ideas of the catholic church, if I'm understanding you right, and thus your choice to identify as a catholic. Good for you. This sounds like choosing your religion based on your beliefs, rather than the other way, something that requires a critical and open mind, something all too rare in our society. However, then you go on to say that (and i'm paraphrasing here -- feel free to correct me) that you have to force yourself to believe things that seem wrong to you because they are a part of your religion, which is exactly backwards of above.
Why must someone's beliefs be packaged into a ready-made religion? Why can't a person believe what they believe, possibly identifying themselves with the established religion that most closely lines up with their own beliefs without allowing the discrepancies between their faith and their religion to be overwhelmed by the establishment?
I'm by no means trying to belittle your beliefs, Shane, nor am I trying to change them. I'm simply trying to understand what you are saying. I'm sorry if this came accross as an attack, I really don't mean it that way.
First to John: Some people see religion as a test: a test of what God is putting them through and making it hard to prove that they are indeed faithful. And some see that the harder the life is, but still lived in a fully Catholic way, that they have lived a good life.
I don't think of this way, but I don't see hardships as punishment, but more of a test. I don't go looking for these hardships, but if they come, I'll gladly take them.
In regards to your last paragraph in your post, some people think that telling someone that having a same sex relationship is wrong or that abortion is wrong is a way of them spreading the Word. And I've met quite a number of these people, and I personally disagree with the way they do it. I actually have no way of going about telling them, so I don't.
And though you meant your post as entertaining, I took it from a serious point of view because it makes me think of my religion, makes me wonder and question and hopefully strengthen where I stand in the Catholic beliefs. And I thoroughly enjoy all these talks :)
To Wookster: (I'm assuming this is Dennis) You said to me, "that you have to force yourself to believe things that seem wrong to you because they are a part of your religion, which is exactly backwards of above." This, I am sad to say, is because I'm conforming. Mostly from my girlfriend who is quite more devout than I. I feel like I have to believe them or it makes me think I'm not "a true Catholic" but the term isn't really defined. My girlfriend is my spiritual "sheperd" you can say. She helps me and guides me in Christ, but sometimes there are just things I don't agree with (and you'll see that in my new post that I write up later). So it sometimes feels like I have to believe things that I don't agree with.
Also the paragraph that starts with: "Why must someone's beliefs be packaged into a ready-made religion?" is yet another topic that I must write upon.
Please understand that I'm new to Catholicism, not being one, but practicing it. I'm still learning stuff about it everyday: the do's and don'ts mostly, but more importantly how I should go about dealing with them.
And don't worry, I don't find any of these posts attacking, and even if they were, I would think of it as "the fire of debate". :)
Post a Comment