pudge's Journal: Religion

John Kerry says he is a devout Catholic, but that he merely disagrees with the Church on certain things.

There's a word for the sort of Catholic who disagrees with the Church on some doctrinal issues, who defines his religion for himself, personally: Protestant. Hand that man a hammer and nail for his theses!

No,

[Bombcar]

The correct Catholic term is Schismatic, if the issue is not of grave moral importance (say, obeying the Bishop). If it is a grave moral issue, then it is Heresy. We're talking excommunication, here.

Oh, well. Kerry's a crappy Catholic anyway.

Re:No,

[robi2106]

holy crap.... that movie is friggin funny.

jason

Re:No,

[pudge]

Yeah!

Re:No,

[pudge]

Yes, but you may note I drew an allusion to Luther, who was branded both a schismatic and a heretic by the Catholic church, and who started the reformation, which begat the Protestants.

Speaking of which, October 31 is the day Luther tacked his theses on the door. Hmmmmm. Maybe on Sunday we should hold a Reformation Day, and honor the sacrifices of many who dared to be branded heretics of the Catholic Church ... muahahahaha. :)

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Protestants

[FortKnox]

It depends. I'm Catholic. I can't think of anything I'm really 'against the church' with. I'm not to big on the whole concept of the Catholics version of Confession, but I still go... That's about it. Kerry is pretty far off the Catholic view, though. I think he's just using it to try to get some religious voters (because Bush has shown he's quite the religious man).

THEOCRACY WATCH

[Jeremiah Cornelius]

Joe Bob says, Check 'em out! [theocracywatch.org]

They gots a movie [theocracywatch.org], too...

Speaking as an ex-Catholic

[Zeriel]

I don't know a single one, including my mostly-ultra-Orthodox mother, who believes in every little thing.

It's the nature of Catholicism to be intensely dogmatic and at the same time turn a largely blind eye to most transgressions/schismaticism.

A sign of a "true" Catholic

[cascadefx]

Having been born and raised Catholic (Catholic school, head altar boy), and now a practicing Protestant, much to the chagrine of my devout mother and converted father, I can assure you few Catholics agree with every stance of the Church, but still consider themselves devout.

I think this is pretty universal. I went to two Catholic schools in two states and, as my father was in the military, was a member of Catholic churches in around 8 communities. Every Catholic (even German Catholics) disagreed with the Church about some fundemental issues.

Issues centering on reproduction are big; how many kids you should have (conversion through procreation), when you should have children, the use of contraception, whether your children should be sent to parochial school or not, etc etc etc.

Most are anti-abortion, but there is a number that don't believe abortion is a legislative issue and should be addressed within the moral context (pro-choice but personally against abortion). They believe that they should address abortion directly and honestly for what it is and create a family and faith community in which abortion is unthinkable rather than outlawing it. These people also have no problems with using contraception and don't hold to the stereotypical Catholic idea of having a lot of children. Kerry seems to fall in this group, from what I know of his beliefs.

Now, this does go against much of the Pope and Church's stance and these people aren't necessarily supported by the Church. However, they hold strong beliefs in Catholicism (Intercessors,Mary, Saints, Transsubstantiation, Confession, etc.) and therefore won't leave the Church. They prefer to affect the direction of the church from the inside. This is hard in a Church that is so dogmatically hierachical (probably nearly impossible), but they do persist. There are a lot of "activist" groups within Catholicism with both liberal and conservative bents (Opus Dei comes to mind) that you should check out. Rome doesn't particularly like them in any form (censuring members of some of the groups, etc) as they challenge its authority.

Re:A sign of a "true" Catholic

[pudge]

Having been born and raised Catholic (Catholic school, head altar boy), and now a practicing Protestant, much to the chagrine of my devout mother and converted father, I can assure you few Catholics agree with every stance of the Church, but still consider themselves devout.

I am well aware of this. I am also well aware of the fact that the Catholic religion does not allow for this on issues of "grave moral importance," as Bombcar said. I know this is not unique to Kerry at all, but that doesn't make it

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:A sign of a "true" Catholic

[pudge]

no it isn't a logical flaw ... I hold similar views

Yes, it certainly is logically flawed.

Wanting the government to protect the rights of people does not mean it has to protect all "human life".

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. --That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men." The PURPOSE of government is to

Re:

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:A sign of a "true" Catholic

[pudge]

Am I to suppose from the context of this quote (ie a reply to "Wanting the government to protect the rights of people does not mean it has to protect all "human life") that you are actually strongly in favour of the government heavily interfering in issues like the growth of skin tissue in labs?

No, why would you? I was quoting the Declaration of Independence which talked about rights for PEOPLE and said the purpose of government is to secure those rights.

Absolute rubbish. This isn't even worth debating

Re:A sign of a "true" Catholic

[Ra5pu7in]

And that position is logically flawed. The reason to be against abortion is because it is a destruction of a human life; if you believe that, and you believe that government is responsible for protecting the rights of people, then you have a paradox, that can be resolved only through self-deception, and not logic.

Not to redirect this, but to point out that logic can be bent depending on the viewpoint, war is also a destruction of a human life - many of them, in fact. Yet many who oppose abortion, with a

Re:A sign of a "true" Catholic

[pudge]

Not to redirect this, but to point out that logic can be bent depending on the viewpoint, war is also a destruction of a human life - many of them, in fact. Yet many who oppose abortion, with a few wild extremists willing to kill doctors (destruction of a human life) to stop abortions, accept the "good reasons" for going to war.

Those extremists are entirely beside the point.

As to the "good reasons," I believe you are referring to the "Just War" theory, which is a well-accepted theory for going to war, ev [usccb.org]

Re:A sign of a "true" Catholic

[Ra5pu7in]

Actually I was referring to the various reasons individuals I know who are Catholic have used to try to justify various wars. (My children are baptised Catholic but I have never been, so at best I only have a cursory knowledge of papal doctrine. However, I do know quite a number of Catholics of many varieties.)

As to my mention of the extremists, I called them "a few wild extremists" meaning them to be the exception. The point was that it is not just those who can excuse other forms of destroying human l