Thank you Thomas. One of the reasons I find for this is that the church changes so slowly. Just look at how many people left the church after the second vatican council because Latin was no longer the language of the mass. Some people do get really concerned about the silly stuff. But the majority do not. And some people really like what Catholicism is all about, and this takes a deeper understanding of its roots than just the average persons ideas about hierarchy, power, and corrupted child-molesting clergy. For those of us who do want to remain in the church, and are also liberal (as I am) we find ourselves grappling daily with what it means to be a Catholic if we don't follow all the rules. Are we still Catholic? I think that yes, we are. Because there are certain aspects of this sect that are unique to it...the eucharist, the veneration (though, not worship) of saints, the seven sacriments (unique ones being, annointing of the sick, last rites, and reconciliation).
Also I think that Catholicism is built for people within a certain mind-frame. That is, the Puritans may have wanted to strip the church of all its superfluities, and that has been a good thing for many church-goers. But some people need or want the visual reminders. Someone said earlier in this thread that it was like native americans venerating totems - they are simply reminders.
For me, if I see an image of Jesus on the cross hanging before the Altar, I do not think that that is Jesus Himself. But it certainly helps remind me of all he did. The same goes for all the little hand motions we do, blessing ourselves, genuflecting, and crossing our minds, lips, and hearts. It may seem unnecessary and ritualistic, but those actions hold meaning, and if you understand what that meaning is, it can make your experience with God that much closer. It is a reminder of him for those who like to have it.
Daniellejean - when I was little I thought all those motions and stuff was to keep us awake during Mass.
But funny thing even today, I find without thought blessing myself. Once being Catholic, that little motion and the Catholic guilt stays with you no matter how your beliefs change.
Sadly, it appears that the most glaring misunderstandings about the true nature of Catholicism are held by the Catholics themselves.
(If desired, the words 'Protestant', 'Muslim', or 'Buddhist' etc. may be substituted in the above statement.)
I wonder if Denis Diderot realized the prophetic nature of his statement:
Denis Diderot wrote:Mankind will never be truly free until the last king has been strangled with the entrails of the last priest.
what do you mean about Catholics misunderstanding themselves?
daniellejean wrote:what do you mean about Catholics misunderstanding themselves?
OK, one thing at a time: Which Catholic (and protestant) religious festival is named after
Astarte, goddess of sexuality, who in Canaanite worship was husband of
Molech, the God who accepted the fiery sacrifice of living children?
Do you really think God is pleased with this observance?
My opinion may be found
here.
neologist wrote:daniellejean wrote:what do you mean about Catholics misunderstanding themselves?
OK, one thing at a time: Which Catholic (and protestant) religious festival is named after
Astarte, goddess of sexuality, who in Canaanite worship was husband of
Molech, the God who accepted the fiery sacrifice of living children?
Do you really think God is pleased with this observance?
My opinion may be found
here.
I think most Catholics know about Easter's pagan connection. And yes I think God is pleased that the Church removed the pagan elements from the festival and replaced it with a celebration of the resurrection of Christ.
Thomas wrote:I think this is the key for understanding the "extremely conservative" part. The doctrine of the Catholic Church is indeed very conservative in parts -- as when it condemns contraception as comparable to abortion, proscribes sex to its priests, and denies women a role in the administering the church that they are as much part of as male Catholics.
But while Catholic doctrine is on the conservative side, in my experience Catholic individuals tend to care surprisingly little about the doctrines of their church. When I attended confirmation class in my Lutheran community, part of the program was to hang out with that year's Catholic confirmation class. My impression from that experience was that while Lutherans had a lot fewer stupid rules, we were strongly expected to follow whatever rules we had. By contrast, my Catholic companions basically didn't care about the doctrines of their Church at all.
So my explanation for this particular prejudice about Catholics is this: Protestants hear about all these doctrines that Catholics have, expect that Catholics deeply care about them try as hard to follow them as Protestants follow theirs, and arrive at the conclusion that Catholics are backward. It is this disconnect between the church organization and the community that I find typical of Catholicism, not that Catholics are especially conservative.
My experience has been just the opposite. What percentage of Presbyterians do you think even know what TULIP is?
ye110man wrote:neologist wrote:daniellejean wrote:what do you mean about Catholics misunderstanding themselves?
OK, one thing at a time: Which Catholic (and protestant) religious festival is named after
Astarte, goddess of sexuality, who in Canaanite worship was husband of
Molech, the God who accepted the fiery sacrifice of living children?
Do you really think God is pleased with this observance?
My opinion may be found
here.
I think most Catholics know about Easter's pagan connection. And yes I think God is pleased that the Church removed the pagan elements from the festival and replaced it with a celebration of the resurrection of Christ.
Removed the pagan elements?
I have always believed that the integration of Pagan elements around Easter and Christmas: namely the celebration of spring, and the Christmas tree, were employed in order to make an easier transition into Christianity for Gentiles. Perhaps that seems unholy to you Neologist. But the goal is to get the Word to a high volume of people. This was just a means to an end.
neologist wrote:ye110man wrote:neologist wrote:daniellejean wrote:what do you mean about Catholics misunderstanding themselves?
OK, one thing at a time: Which Catholic (and protestant) religious festival is named after
Astarte, goddess of sexuality, who in Canaanite worship was husband of
Molech, the God who accepted the fiery sacrifice of living children?
Do you really think God is pleased with this observance?
My opinion may be found
here.
I think most Catholics know about Easter's pagan connection. And yes I think God is pleased that the Church removed the pagan elements from the festival and replaced it with a celebration of the resurrection of Christ.
Removed the pagan elements?
Yes. Today Easter reminds people more of Jesus than it does of the pagan goddess. Surely God must be pleased with the Church.
In the name a da Daddy-O, da Laddie-O an a Holy Spook, Boom, you all be blessed . . .
ye110man wrote: Yes. Today Easter reminds people more of Jesus than it does of the pagan goddess. Surely God must be pleased with the Church.
What about the bunnies?
Setanta wrote:In the name a da Daddy-O, da Laddie-O an a Holy Spook, Boom, you all be blessed . . .
Interesting you should invoke a trinity of La -de- dahs, as that is just another pagan doctrine blithely accepted by the church.
That snotty characterization is only valid on the basis of some one of the many half-witted "christian" theologies being the "true" doctrine. As i find them all contemptuously silly, you may well imagine how amusing it is to see one self-described christian bashing the belief system of any other.
Setanta wrote:That snotty characterization is only valid on the basis of some one of the many half-witted "christian" theologies being the "true" doctrine. As i find them all contemptuously silly, you may well imagine how amusing it is to see one self-described christian bashing the belief system of any other.
Anything to get a laugh out of my curmudgeonly friend.
But the fact that trinitarian belief predates christianity is well known.
I'll go blow my nose now.
You take the purge, y'hear.
Setanta wrote:Don't count on it . . .
I would never insist, my friend.
neologist wrote:ye110man wrote: Yes. Today Easter reminds people more of Jesus than it does of the pagan goddess. Surely God must be pleased with the Church.
What about the bunnies?
When you see bunnies, do you think "pagan symbol of fertility"? If not, the Church has successfully purged that non-godly connection. Today more people think the rabbits and eggs have to be with washing away of sins and new birth in Christ than anything else. Truely a Church that can accomplish that is an instrument of God.
So, now it would be OK to revere a golden calf, so long as we call it by a holy name? (Exodus 32)
I don't know anyone that reveres rabbits. That would not be OK.
ye110man wrote:neologist wrote:ye110man wrote: Yes. Today Easter reminds people more of Jesus than it does of the pagan goddess. Surely God must be pleased with the Church.
What about the bunnies?
When you see bunnies, do you think "pagan symbol of fertility"? If not, the Church has successfully purged that non-godly connection. Today more people think the rabbits and eggs have to be with washing away of sins and new birth in Christ than anything else. Truely a Church that can accomplish that is an instrument of God.
Actually, I think commercialism did more to remove the original meaning of rabbits and eggs than anything the church did.
