Why are people so quick to criticise the Catholic Church?

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Why are people so quick to criticise the Catholic Church?

Because it's a failure and promotes a long con as truth?

 

[shunyadragon]

Why are people so quick to criticise the Catholic Church?

Because it's a failure and promotes a long con as truth?

Not clear and vague, and the quickness is not the issue here, but are you referring to the Roman Church as a con game?

Truth is a luxury of fallible human vanity.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

Not clear and vague, and the quickness is not the issue here, but are you referring to the Roman Church as a con game?

Truth is a luxury of fallible human vanity.

All I can say is, thank god the god of Abraham is only a figment of people's imaginations...

Heaven with him would be hell.

 

[shunyadragon]

All I can say is, thank god the god of Abraham is only a figment of people's imaginations...

Heaven with him would be hell.

OK! Your position is crystal clear!

 

[shunyadragon]

In the English speaking world there's a centuries' old tradition of sectarian bigotry against Catholicism whose remnant hasn't been entirely extricated.

But moreso today it's a combination of the Church's importance and ostensible conservationism which makes it a convenient enemy for many among certain ideological camps.

Your missing the fact that sectarian bigotry is two way street between different churches and religions including the Roman Church and its highly problematic history.

More to follow . . .

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

OK! Your position is crystal clear!

Well, I forgot to respond to your question about the Catholic church...

Yes, the Catholic church is a con game...

God is evident in nature and through reason alone. It requires NO faith to know god exists.

The ONLY faith that is required or desired of you is the faith that religious con-men ask you to give to them to believe in THEIR silly rendition of this god we can ALL see evident in nature.

The god of Abraham is one of many man made renditions of a more universal god evident in creation...

 

[Vouthon]

Well, I forgot to respond to your question about the Catholic church...

Yes, the Catholic church is a con game...

God is evident in nature and through reason alone. It requires NO faith to know god exists.

So, I take it you aren't aware that the above stance is actually a de fide teaching of the Catholic Church?

Pius IX     Vatican I

FIRST VATICAN COUNCIL (1869-1870)

The same Holy mother Church holds and teaches that God, the source and end of all things, can be known with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the natural power of human reason : ever since the creation of the world, his invisible nature has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made​

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

So, I take it you aren't aware that the above stance is actually a de fide teaching of the Catholic Church?

Pius IX Vatican I

FIRST VATICAN COUNCIL (1869-1870)

The same Holy mother Church holds and teaches that God, the source and end of all things, can be known with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the natural power of human reason : ever since the creation of the world, his invisible nature has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made​

Funny how you fail to mention that they then ask you for your faith to believe that god came down to the earth in spirit form and impregnated a teenage Jewish virgin, ask you for your faith to believe that his son had magic spit that could make the deaf hear and the blind see, ask you to have faith that his son could cast demons out of people and into pigs, ask you to have faith that his son could walk on water, his son could raise the dead, his son could resurrect himself after having been dead for three days...

 

[Estro Felino]

In reality the Vatican II changed nothing as far as the core doctrines and dogma of the Roman Church. There was a lot of flowery polite language for superficial eccumenism, but always followed by clear statements reaffirming fundamentals of the church. The biggest change was in advocating greater diplomacy and dialogue outside the church to essentially reduce the traditional isolation of the church. There was also some conditional acknowledgment of some of the negative aspects of the relationships with past religions like Judaism.

I wonder why the most modern and anthropocentric messages throughout Christendom turn out to be pronounced by Catholic priests...

Funny how you fail to mention that they then ask you for your faith to believe that god came down to the earth in spirit form and impregnated a teenage Jewish virgin, ask you for your faith to believe that his son had magic spit that could make the deaf hear and the blind see, ask you to have faith that his son could cast demons out of people and into pigs, ask you to have faith that his son could walk on water, his son could raise the dead, his son could resurrect himself after having been dead for three days...

With all due respect , this RF section is for people who share the same faith. If you want, you can ask mods to move this thread to Religious Debates.

I'm new here, I wasn't aware that we couldn't discuss whatever we want wherever we want. I was just browsing recent posts because a lot of threads are pretty much static and unchanging...

So I can't debate subjects here?

Well...welcome aboard
Technically, no...there must be a reason why the OP chose this section...you should ask @ronki23 ....
btw...I do think this thread should be moved to allow everyone to participate

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

I wonder why the most modern and anthropocentric messages throughout Christendom turn out to be pronounced by Catholic priests...

With all due respect , this RF section is for people who share the same faith. If you want, you can ask mods to move this thread to Religious Debates.

I'm new here, I wasn't aware that we couldn't discuss whatever we want wherever we want. I was just browsing recent posts because a lot of threads are pretty much static and unchanging...

So I can't debate subjects here?

 

[shunyadragon]

I wonder why the most modern and anthropocentric messages throughout Christendom turn out to be pronounced by Catholic priests...

With all due respect , this RF section is for people who share the same faith. If you want, you can ask mods to move this thread to Religious Debates.

I did not realize this thread was there, but there is a problem that brought on this misunderstanding. The title of the thread appears to be asking non-believers why they are so quick to criticize the Roman Church.

. . . because of the thrust of the thread I believe it should be moved.

 

[metis]

As person who received a very traditional Catholic upbringing, the answer is no; we are not taught to look down on other Christian denominations. We don't even talk about them.

And that's also been my experience of attending mass for over 50 years.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

So, I take it you aren't aware that the above stance is actually a de fide teaching of the Catholic Church?

Pius IX Vatican I

FIRST VATICAN COUNCIL (1869-1870)

The same Holy mother Church holds and teaches that God, the source and end of all things, can be known with certainty from the consideration of created things, by the natural power of human reason : ever since the creation of the world, his invisible nature has been clearly perceived in the things that have been made​

Another thing to keep in mind RE this Vatican Council... Did you notice the year this was put out?

1869-1870... which is only a little while after deistic philosophy was taking hold in the west.

Deism as a philosophy was beginning to pick up steam among the intellectuals of Europe.

This announcement by the Vatican mirrors the deistic philosophy of the day.

 

[metis]

There have been some significant changes that have taken place with the Church, largely due to the effects of Vatican II, the movement to more accept ecumenism, and a greater acceptance of modern science. Maybe that's not enough for some, which I can understand, but there also have been many Catholics who have not been happy with these changes, including even some of the bishops who are less than pleased with Pope Francis, both with some of the statements he's made and also with some of his appointees.

However, historically the Church typically changes very s-l-o-w-l-y, no doubt.

 

[metis]

So I can't debate subjects here?

If it says "Same Faith Debate", as it does on the top of the page, no. Same applies to those marked "___ DIR".

Also, there's a difference here between debating some teachings of a religion/denomination versus attacking the entire religion/denomination, the latter of which is a no-no, although we don't see it enforced much.

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

If it says "Same Faith Debate", as it does on the top of the page, no. Same applies to those marked "___ DIR".

Really? I didn't realize the site created safe spaces... Weak sauce! ;-)

Well, I'll be more mindful of that going forward, but if anyone replies to any of my comments here I'll continue them for now.

 

[metis]

Well, I'll be more mindful of that going forward, but if anyone replies to any of my comments here I'll continue them for now.

That is not allowed and you could be issued a warning if you don't follow the rules here. If one understand they made a mistake, best to apologize and move on.

 

[Vouthon]

Another thing to keep in mind RE this Vatican Council... Did you notice the year this was put out?

1869-1870... which is only a little while after deistic philosophy was taking hold in the west.

Deism as a philosophy was beginning to pick up steam among the intellectuals of Europe.

This announcement by the Vatican mirrors the deistic philosophy of the day.

OK, I'll take it back to the medieval period for you then:

Internet History Sourcebooks Project

THOMAS AQUINAS: SUMMA THEOLOGIAE (1266 - 1273)


It must be said that God's existence and other things about him which (as Paul says) can be known by natural reason...For faith presupposes natural knowledge just as grace presupposes nature and perfection presupposes something which can be perfected.

​

Thomas Aquinas: Contra Gentiles: English

There are some truths which the natural reason also is able to reach. Such are that God exists, that He is one, and the like. In fact, such truths about God have been proved demonstratively by the philosophers, guided by the light of the natural reason.


​

 

[Drizzt Do'Urden]

OK, I'll take it back to the medieval period for you then:

Internet History Sourcebooks Project

THOMAS AQUINAS: SUMMA THEOLOGIAE (1266 - 1273)


It must be said that God's existence and other things about him which (as Paul says) can be known by natural reason...For faith presupposes natural knowledge just as grace presupposes nature and perfection presupposes something which can be perfected.​

LOL! Not quite the same, but even if it was, if they got it right the first time, why did they feel a need to restate things in 1869-1870?

Must be coincidence...

In any event, all theistic gods flow from deistic ones. After all, you have to believe in the generic concept of god first before you can become a believer in a god that has a name, believe in a god that chooses a chosen people, believe in a god that employs certain humans to act as his prophets to other men, believe in a god that rules the universe as a king rules his kingdom issuing edicts and demanding obedience from it.

 

[Vouthon]

LOL! Not quite the same, but even if it was, if they got it right the first time, why did they feel a need to restate things in 1869-1870?

The church continually reiterates its core teachings at ecumenical councils, as well as through the ordinary Magisterium.

And how do those two quotations differ from the later Vatican I declaration?