Welcome!
You may find this board a tough gig for people who confuse faith and science.
On to my questions…
Why are works defending the faith called “apologetics”? This doesn’t sound like the usual meaning of ‘apology’ to me–“I’m sorry, I did something wrong”–has the English word drifted in meaning?
Crap, he’s offline. I’ll take this one.
http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/apology
apology
1530s, “defense, justification,” from L.L. apologia , from Gk. apologia “a speech in defense,” from apologeisthai “to speak in one’s defense,” from apologos “an account, story,” from apo- “from, off” (see apo-) + logos “speech.” The original English sense of “self-justification” yielded a meaning “frank expression of regret for wrong done,” first recorded 1590s, but it was not the main sense until 18c. The old sense tends to emerge in Latin form apologia (first attested 1784), especially since J.H. Newman’s “Apologia pro Vita Sua” (1864).
How many core Catholic tenets can one violate and still be considered Catholic by the church? Can one skip church? Use birth control? Have pre-marital sex? Support the death penalty? Get a divorce? Have an abortion?
What’s your view on the recent excommunication of the nun (and, basically, the whole hospital) where an abortion was performed in order to save the life of that mother? Was the bishop who did the excommunication right or wrong?
What is the official Catholic view on people who die without being baptized? Does it matter whether they had the opportunity to be baptized?
I don’t know what kind of conservative you are, but it seems that some forms of fiscal conservative that would deny welfare and health care to the poorest among us seem to go against Catholic teaching. What is your view on that?
What is your view on the Iraq war? I could be wrong, but I seem to remember that the Catholic church was against it, and many conservatives were for it.
What is your view on condom programs in Africa?
I know the Catholic church is opposed to abortion and mostly opposed to the death penalty. Why does the Catholic church seem to give a pass to pro-death penalty politicians but not pro-choice politicians (even if they are personally opposed to abortion)?
In all fairness, while I know some Catholics (my mom’s family is Irish Catholic, although most of them, including my mom, are lapsed), it’s hard to ask them the sort of question you can ask in a “ask the” thread, like “how can you possibly remain loyal to an institution that has repeatedly been shown to care more about child molesters than the children they have victimized?”. You know, without sounding like an asshole. But that’s already been asked, so it’s just a hypothetical.
True, but people not knowing about their own religion isn’t uncommon, I wouldn’t think enough of a reason to prompt a Q&A. I wouldn’t go to Alabama and start an “Ask the Baptist” discussion. If you’re not a Baptist, you’ve probably run into one, and know as much about it as you’re willing to. I would in AL start a “Ask the Baha’i” chat.
Fair enough.
Do you agree with everything the Church says or is there aspects of the faith that you hold true that the Church does not?
So are these rational or emotional arguments? I ask because, in my very limited experience, religious faith is not a rational thing, so it’s hard for me to understand how someone could be rationally convinced into changing their faith. Are they to shore up the beliefs of people who already have the faith, and may be doubting?
Paraphrased from my (very) Catholic dad: “There are many orders of magnitude more abortions than there are executions. Once we deal with abortion, the death penalty is next. Heck, there were less than 50 executions in the US last year, we’re already doing pretty well there.”
On the other hand, it would be much easier to stop 50 death penalties than however many abortions, so the church could knock that problem off the list pretty easily. And, it’s still a state-by-state issue, so they could attack the problem piecemeal, similar to how gay marriage is becoming legalized piecemeal.
Anyway, I know it’s not your position, but it still seems like an inconsistent position to take, especially when some bishop goes so far as to deny communion to a pro-choice politician, but not the pro-death penalty politician.
One question at a time. (I’ll get to the rest.)
Let me give you some facts. Its hard to put briefly, but I will try:
FIRST: The Church is not a single corporate entitily as most people think. Even though were are “one” regarding doctrines and beliefs, when it comes to management and administrative affairs, each diocese and its bishop are COMPLETELY autonomous. You could compare the set-up to the governors of states: Governors are all Americans under the same American flag and US Constitution, but no governor has any say at all in what another governor of another state does. So while a few misguided bishops handled things badly, you cannot say that “the whole Church-covering-up-for-child-molesters”. That is simply a non-sequitor. The vast majority of bishops handle their business just fine. But, just as there was a Judas among the 12 apostles (constituting about an 8% screw-up ratio) there are always some bad eggs in the Church.
SECOND: The VAST mojority of these cases involved boys around the age of 14 or so. That means the issue is homosexuality, not pedophelia. This is a CRUCIAL point that the media TOTALLY ignored. Why? Because the media PROMOTES the homosexual lifestyle, and they can hardly say that it caused the problem. But framing it as “pedophelia” was sure to arouse anger because people hate those who harm children (and the media hates the church I might add) and that was the spin the media gave it.
Now mind you, I AM NOT EXCUSING THE PRIESTS AT ALL. But, you cannot fix a problem if you don’t know the root of the problem, and it was not pedophelia (although there were a few instances of that as well.)
Holy Cow!! All these posts already? Give me some time folks.
You are talking about “orders”, not branches.
All priests - or nuns for that matter - belong to the One Church, and believe in One set of doctrines. The different “orders” are based on the spiritual disciplines of their founders and emphasize one aspect of the faith more than others: Jesuits, Fransiscans, Dominicans, the Sisters of Mercy, etc. etc. Some emphasize education, some emphasize care for the poor, some emphasize the monastic disciplines, etc.
That’s an easy one, from a Catholic perspective that is.
Governments were created by men and are flawed.
The Church was founded by Jesus and is guided by the Holy Spirit. God guides those he chooses to teach: He guided the prophets, he guided the men who wrote the Bible, and I believe he guides the Pope and Bishops, who we consider to be the “successors” of the Apostles.
I question man’s inventions, but not that which was established by Christ.
Well that’s not really a Catholic-specific question. Who can say how each of us would have led our lives if we had taken a diffent path in the past. I really do not know the answer to that.
The media are not a single corporate entity either with a unified viewpoint and agenda either. I’m surprised you make that mistake after catching it in the description of the church.
But it sounds to me more like the issue was unwanted sexual advances. Whether they were homosexual or heterosexual was not as important as whether they were wanted. Another problem was whether the advancer was in a position of power over the target. There’s a reason we don’t allow teachers or bosses to have sexual relationships with those they have power over: two people can’t have a relationship of equals and a relationship of unequals at the same time.
Bishop Fulton J. Sheen once said:
“There are not a hundred people in America who hate the Catholic Church. There are millions of people who hate what they wrongly believe to be the Catholic Church — which is, of course, quite a different thing.”
That is so very true. The majority of people - including many Catholics sadly - don’t understand what the Church truly is and what it actually does teache. they THINK they do, but they don’t Whenever I can I like to provide information.
Good question. I’d tend to dismiss “emotional” argumentation right off the bat, because I think most religious people would agree that faith is not dependent on “emotion”. Moreover, argumentation from emotion is a logical fallacy. I’m never going to believe something because you tell me you feel that it’s true, and, while I may be “wowed” by an impassioned discourse, once the “feeling” subsides, any such discourse would have to stand on its own merits.
But, is apologetics “rational”? Here’s what the 1907 Catholic Encylcopedia has to say, at a time when the world was at the height of empiricist / positivist sway:
http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/01618a.htm
So, the argument itself has to be rational, and internally logically consistent, but “revelation” itself is not something that can be “proven” a priori, or according to Newton’s scientific method. It’s revealed. Logical argumentation might make one more or less receptive to revealed truth, but it can never convince, in and of itself, absent an act of faith assisted by the Holy Spirit.
That’s all I can say off the top of my head without referring to a Catechism or other authority.
But, in short, I don’t think that in 21st Century society, faith and reason are in conflict. Physicists can’t say there is no God, and theologians can’t speculate as to what might have happened, cosmologically speaking, a moment or two before the Big Bang.
Individual dioceses are definitely not completely autonomous and the Vatican (remember them?) has been heavily implicated in quite a few of the cases that have come to light.
I know the media is not monolthic in its political and social views, but there IS a general ignorance in matters of the Church.
As I said, I in no way am trying to excuse those priests. And you’re right: Unwanted sexual advances are wrong in ANY situation. But just as a doctor cannot cure a disease without a proper diagnosis, so too this problem cannot be fixed unless its roots are properly understood.
Is this your opinion or is this a view expressed by the Catholic church?