You know I'm not a fan of any religions but I've always kind of liked Catholicism. I mean I don't believe any of it really but Its just seemed more authentic than a lot of other other denominations just because they are more true to the Bible as a whole as it is today. There aren't as many parts they just ignore because it doesn't fit what they believe. Sure, a lot of what they preach is outdated and or offensive by today's standards but at least they aren't dicks about it like the Evangelists.
Sure, a lot of what they preach is outdated and or offensive by today's standards but at least they aren't dicks about it like the Evangelists.
80% of Catholics I know are Cafeteria Catholics who pick and choose what dogma and catechism they want to accept. 10% are hardliners who believe every word and wish the Mass was still in Latin. The remaining 10% believe you need special dispensation from the Cardinal to use a condom and believe in the saving power of conversion. Note that this only applies to layman and not the actual clergy, which can be corrupt, criminal, or generally attempting to just help people get by, and that these are just rough numbers from the 18 years I actively attended church.
20% is still a lot of crazy for a religion that's over a billion strong, but those fringe can be ignored a hell of a lot more easily than the entire body of the US Pentecostals, Seven Day Adventists, Evangelicals, Mormons, etc.
In reality I think the reason I like Catholicism is because lots of "Catholics" are actually atheists for most of their lives and just admit when they are older.
In reality I think the reason I like Catholicism is because lots of "Catholics" are actually atheists for most of their lives and just admit when they are older.
A lot of Catholics I know that are my age have major problems with the church, but are just waiting until circumstances are right to jump ship.
In reality I think the reason I like Catholicism is because lots of "Catholics" are actually atheists for most of their lives and just admit when they are older.
A lot of Catholics I know that are my age have major problems with the church, but are just waiting until circumstances are right to jump ship.
I wouldn't doubt it. I think its because Its more like the religion is being forced on them rather than a sort of brainwashing/indoctrination like a lot of the crazier denominations.
Fuck you, Beck. Fuck you right in the eye. The only other thing I've seen on the internet where someone was thanking/attributing god to the quake turned out to be a troll.
@Ninjarabbi - I have some issue with the "Catholics follow the Bible more closely" statement. Confessionals, cardinals, priests, popes, baptizing babies, and several other things are not in the Bible and are not Biblical requirements to go to heaven like some Catholics seem to think.
Catholics follow the traditions of Catholicism. Orthodox Catholics like myself follow the the old traditions more closely than Roman Catholics.
Anyway, my fail is there was a second Chinatown bus crash on the NJT. The driver and a 20 year kid were killed, many more injured. Also there's a lot of shadiness coming to light in the first crash. I never thought those buses were legit. >_>
@Ninjarabbi - I have some issue with the "Catholics follow the Bible more closely" statement. Confessionals, cardinals, priests, popes, baptizing babies, and several other things are not in the Bible and are not Biblical requirements to go to heaven like some Catholics seem to think.
Oh you're right. I just more meant that it has LESS picking and choosing and whatnot compared to many other denomination. And no matter what denomination you're going to have different bits added or changed. I guess I should have said Catholicism doesn't seem to have changed as much as the others.
@Ninjarabbi - I have some issue with the "Catholics follow the Bible more closely" statement. Confessionals, cardinals, priests, popes, baptizing babies, and several other things are not in the Bible and are not Biblical requirements to go to heaven like some Catholics seem to think.
You can say this about every Christian religion. They're all just contrivances of ritualistic practices based on the same book, which no longer exists in its original form. If you want to follow the bible closely, I could make a good case for you being a danger to society.
The Catholic religions are more traditional in that their abstractions and practices were generated starting in the early decades of the first millenium and solidified at the Great Schism. Pretty much everything else that still exists is a post-enlightenment modification of Catholic practices.
Wow, WuB, your Kairos experience was way different than mine. Mine was mostly about how cool it was to be able to smoke cigarettes in front of teachers and they wouldn't say anything because it was a retreat. That's basically the only thing I remember, aside from kissing a stuffed deer head.
Well, actually, I remember that people write you a bunch of letters and then you open them alone in your room and you're supposed to cry because OH WOW PEOPLE FEEL THINGS ABOUT me. But since I don't feel things about people I just smoked more cigarettes and played basketball.
Like I said: I didn't attend it. I only heard stories after the fact. As I understand it, lots of schools run it very, very differently. None of my friends at other Catholic high schools had any such experiences.
If I could have just sat around and smoked cigarettes around my teachers, I might have gone. But I had Model UN, so I got to fly out to Boston, eat delicious lobster on the school's dime, and smoke cigarettes there. Good times.
You can't say it about EVERY Christian, because there's non-denominational, like me. I just take the Bible and interpret it one way or the other. I haven't added or removed anything, I just choose an interpretation that makes sense to me.
Rage is pretty good, but even that is something that bores me pretty quick. Poop doesn't happen often enough. Indifference and sarcasm are my best emotions.
You can't say it about EVERY Christian, because there's non-denominational, like me. I just take the Bible and interpret it one way or the other. I haven't added or removed anything, I just choose an interpretation that makes sense to me.
Your interpretation could still be massively wrong, though. Who's to say what you think is a biblical requirement for salvation is actually a requirement? What do you think about divorce? Because Jesus teaches that divorce is unnecessary and a sin. That's pretty plain to see.
What about wearing linen shirts while wearing blue jeans? The Old Testament claims that the mixing of fabrics is an abomination. Same thing with eating shellfish. What makes certain parts right and other parts wrong?
You can't say it about EVERY Christian, because there's non-denominational, like me. I just take the Bible and interpret it one way or the other. I haven't added or removed anything, I just choose an interpretation that makes sense to me.
Your interpretation could still be massively wrong, though. Who's to say what you think is a biblical requirement for salvation is actually a requirement? What do you think about divorce? Because Jesus teaches that divorce is unnecessary and a sin. That's pretty plain to see.
What about wearing linen shirts while wearing blue jeans? The Old Testament claims that the mixing of fabrics is an abomination. Same thing with eating shellfish. What makes certain parts right and other parts wrong?
...Never said my interpretation was right. Just saying it's based on the Bible, and not alternative non-Biblical rules, which I mentioned because of my issue with it being said that Catholics are "the most Biblical" sect of Christianity...When once again, a lot of Catholic traditions, that are said to be required for getting to Heaven, aren't in the Bible. I'm not saying they're wrong, just that it's not Biblical.
Every Catholic tradition has a Biblical root. The ones that don't were weeded out (Plenary indulgences, etc). Read the Catechism sometime. However, I'm not sure you can say any Christian religion is "based on the Bible" anymore. We spent about a month in high school studying how the myriad translations basically mutated the Bible. The Bible as we know it today would likely be completely alien to St Peter.
Fine, point taken. But still, catechisms aren't part of the Bible, they are instead separate documents created by individual sects. They create their own rules. The Pope isn't in the Bible. The Bible says all humans are equally sinful. Catholicism says the Pope is higher than human and more pure. That's all I'm saying. It's just blatantly not Biblical.
However, there was one retreat that was not Jesuit in origin, and was quite cult-like. At the retreat center, all electronics were confiscated and all clocks concealed so that you'd have no sense of time. Outside hours and windowed rooms were limited so the sun could not be used. Activities kept you awake. The result was a four-day period with an average of four hours of sleep nightly. Upon arrival, you were ruthlessly insulted by various chaperones to feel worthless. As you entered sleep delirium and dysphoria, everyone began love-bombing each other out of desperation while at the same time being bombarded with sermons about the holy spirit. The result was that euphoria could be induced in those of the retreat, and then a religious experience could be tied to it. When students would return from school, they'd call it "Kai-high," a period of about a seven-day endorphin overload with lots of hugs between retreatmates and the like. Then, they'd actively pressure other people to go on the next retreat. The practices were kept highly secret ("The Secrets of Kairos," they were even called) in order to prevent anyone from knowing what actually caused all this happiness. I never went; I was so profoundly weirded out by the obvious cult practices (sleep deprivation, love bombing, dressing down) that I publicly spoke against going.
I almost wish my retreats had gone like that instead of "So you come home and your house is on fire. You only have time to get 10 things." "I don't walk into a burning building. That's stupid." "Cameron, are you going to take this seriously?" "Fine. I take the fire out. Problem solved."
Fine, point taken. But still, catechisms aren't part of the Bible, they are instead separate documents created by individual sects. They create their own rules. The Pope isn't in the Bible. The Bible says all humans are equally sinful. Catholicism says the Pope is higher than human and more pure. That's all I'm saying. It's just blatantly not Biblical.
Catechisms explain the biblical rational behind all those rules. For example, the pope is considered the Vicar of Christ and the Head of the Holy Roman Church because he claims direct apostolic succession from Peter, who was allegedly told by Christ that he would hold the keys to the kingdom.
Obviously, whether or not that means anything at all is a point of contention (I use to be Catholic, and I still loathed the current Pope). However, there is an established Biblical precedent in the Catechism for the papacy that is no more silly than any other Christian belief. Also, the idea that the pope is "higher than human and more pure" and somehow less sinful than other human beings is downright wrong. I'm not sure where you pulled that from, but I was never taught that, and most Catholics I know would say that that simply isn't true. And before you point to infallibility, speaking ex cathedra is the equivalent of a political edict or executive order, but for a religion: It's just the guy at the top of the hierarchy saying, "This is how it is." Of course, it all goes back to a really old book and a man in the sky, but that point is moot.
Additionally, "Biblical" is a shaky concept. I mean, the genocide of the Samaritans is considered Biblically correct. So, if that's the case, I'd rather have a pope who might not have his base in 2000 year old scrolls but apologizes for mass murder rather than no pope and the passive acceptance of everything from genocide to the keeping of wives as chattel slaves.
What about wearing linen shirts while wearing blue jeans? The Old Testament claims that the mixing of fabrics is an abomination. Same thing with eating shellfish. What makes certain parts right and other parts wrong?
This was a ceremonial law to keep you pure when visiting the temple. If you aren't going to the temple, no worries.
Especially if The Temple isn't around at the moment. Maybe we should rebuild the place and burn stuff!
Actually, there's a nice sci-fi story seed. There's no "god" because we stopped calling down his attention. The crazies eventually rebuild the "proper" temple and, with the first sacrifice, bring god's terrible gaze back to the Earth. Turns out destroying the temple in our ancient past was the culmination of a holy war to free ourselves of this dread influence from the outside. The ultra-orthadox who rebuilt the temple, like lovecraftian cultists, were the enemy unknowing.
...
I'll note that ten seconds into starting to type that, I realized it's The Prince of Nothing, with a hint of The Golden Compass. Nothing to see here: move along.
Comments
20% is still a lot of crazy for a religion that's over a billion strong, but those fringe can be ignored a hell of a lot more easily than the entire body of the US Pentecostals, Seven Day Adventists, Evangelicals, Mormons, etc.
The only other thing I've seen on the internet where someone was thanking/attributing god to the quake turned out to be a troll.
Anyway, my fail is there was a second Chinatown bus crash on the NJT. The driver and a 20 year kid were killed, many more injured. Also there's a lot of shadiness coming to light in the first crash. I never thought those buses were legit. >_>
The Catholic religions are more traditional in that their abstractions and practices were generated starting in the early decades of the first millenium and solidified at the Great Schism. Pretty much everything else that still exists is a post-enlightenment modification of Catholic practices.
Well, actually, I remember that people write you a bunch of letters and then you open them alone in your room and you're supposed to cry because OH WOW PEOPLE FEEL THINGS ABOUT me. But since I don't feel things about people I just smoked more cigarettes and played basketball.
If I could have just sat around and smoked cigarettes around my teachers, I might have gone. But I had Model UN, so I got to fly out to Boston, eat delicious lobster on the school's dime, and smoke cigarettes there. Good times.
What about wearing linen shirts while wearing blue jeans? The Old Testament claims that the mixing of fabrics is an abomination. Same thing with eating shellfish. What makes certain parts right and other parts wrong?
But still, catechisms aren't part of the Bible, they are instead separate documents created by individual sects. They create their own rules. The Pope isn't in the Bible. The Bible says all humans are equally sinful. Catholicism says the Pope is higher than human and more pure. That's all I'm saying. It's just blatantly not Biblical.
Obviously, whether or not that means anything at all is a point of contention (I use to be Catholic, and I still loathed the current Pope). However, there is an established Biblical precedent in the Catechism for the papacy that is no more silly than any other Christian belief. Also, the idea that the pope is "higher than human and more pure" and somehow less sinful than other human beings is downright wrong. I'm not sure where you pulled that from, but I was never taught that, and most Catholics I know would say that that simply isn't true. And before you point to infallibility, speaking ex cathedra is the equivalent of a political edict or executive order, but for a religion: It's just the guy at the top of the hierarchy saying, "This is how it is." Of course, it all goes back to a really old book and a man in the sky, but that point is moot.
Additionally, "Biblical" is a shaky concept. I mean, the genocide of the Samaritans is considered Biblically correct. So, if that's the case, I'd rather have a pope who might not have his base in 2000 year old scrolls but apologizes for mass murder rather than no pope and the passive acceptance of everything from genocide to the keeping of wives as chattel slaves.
Actually, there's a nice sci-fi story seed. There's no "god" because we stopped calling down his attention. The crazies eventually rebuild the "proper" temple and, with the first sacrifice, bring god's terrible gaze back to the Earth. Turns out destroying the temple in our ancient past was the culmination of a holy war to free ourselves of this dread influence from the outside. The ultra-orthadox who rebuilt the temple, like lovecraftian cultists, were the enemy unknowing.
...
I'll note that ten seconds into starting to type that, I realized it's The Prince of Nothing, with a hint of The Golden Compass. Nothing to see here: move along.