Suzy, you no doubt know that the People of Israel are “those who wrestle with God“. This event should be celebrated, rather than viewed as threatening.
Speaking not as a Catholic, I have been much more impressed with the theological writings of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI. For my money, Pope Francis is committing the same erro…
Suzy, you no doubt know that the People of Israel are “those who wrestle with God“. This event should be celebrated, rather than viewed as threatening.
Speaking not as a Catholic, I have been much more impressed with the theological writings of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI. For my money, Pope Francis is committing the same errors found on the liberal side of the Protestant churches, largely emptying with all manner of rainbows on their websites. Desperate to fill their churches, some Roman Catholic leaders are turning their faith into a large book group. This has been the temptation across the Jewish and Christian faiths, and too many of my Jewish friends have forsaken belief in God while clinging to the notion that they are somehow still Jewish. Is that not just a tribal claim? One that our woke culture should probe and think about more clearly? This is not a litmus test on homosexuality, abortion or any belief upon which people of conscience might differ but about retaining a sense of humility that confesses that we do not know what we do not know.
It is good that you have reported on this gathering, and I am no fan of mob ravings, either at a Catholic conference or a Bruce Springsteen concert. They become a bit unhinged and expose the animal spirits that lie beneath our better selves. However, not one of us should look with derision at the questions posed by these groups. Only time, and history, will bear out the Truth. I, for one, find these movements to be much more intellectually challenging than the “I’m OK, you’re OK” pablum of our post- modern age.
Ask Sam Harris about a future without God. He will probably say it is the unshackling of humanity and send you a link to his meditation app. Because, after all, he and his friends have real knowledge. Just ask him.
> too many of my Jewish friends have forsaken belief in God while clinging to the notion that they are somehow still Jewish
This is quite common among Quakers, too. Many Quakers who attend meeting every Sunday - probably more than half of those who are under 40 - are atheist or agnostic.
Well said, although I think conservative-leaning Catholics (myself among them) often fail to appreciate the importance of Pope Francis’ contributions to Church culture. They focus on and mischaracterize a handful of his remarks to the exclusion of his larger evangelization efforts which both conserve and expand upon Church tradition. People make mistakes when they approach Catholicism through the lense of the American political binary.
I believe the Catholic Church has abandoned its most sacred principles. Abortion used to be a deadly sin. Now it seems to be OK with the church. Why else would the Pope suck up to the ever senile Joe and the Wicked Bitch of the West Nancy Pelosi instead of excommunicating them for supporting abortion?
It is either a sin or it isn't. To me it is black and white, no wriggle room. If it is a mortal sin, excommunicate them. If it isn't suck up to the leaders of abortion and that is exactly what this Pope did.
Many priests witnessed the poverty in Latin America and became communists. I believe Francis, an Argentine, was influenced by this. I'm not calling him communist but he is an anti-capitalist and very left wing.
Even after he was a cardinal, he lived in the poorest section of Buenos Aires and caught the bus to work every day. This is admirable but it also had to influence his thinking.
And you? How go you feel about poverty? Like Jesus did? Or like the shallow selfish people at this conference who have forgotten the social justice part of Catholicism, which Jesus gave more shits about than he did abortion.
I’m fine with it. It’s sad but it’s a woman’s prerogative until the baby is born. It’s her body. And I’m not changing the subject, because abortion is all these churchy people care about — not social justice. Live babies? Live mothers? Poor mothers? No concern. In fact, religion for them is now a way to divide, to separate the worthy from the unworthy. It’s snobbery, it’s pathetic and it’s un-Christian.
Not true actually, Noah. I don’t think there are more adoptive parents and donors to crisis pregnancy centers than religious Christians. Do you? Thoug I’m sorry you’ve clearly had bad experiences with some Christians, that’s a pretty slanderous statement and mindlessly so.
But you seem to think abortion is a solution to poverty by this argument…
I don’t understand your statement about adoption. Are you saying religious Christians are the most generous supporters of adoption? That would be admirable, I agree. Now your assumption that I’ve had bad experiences with Christians is just kooky. What I’ve done is read about and listened to the garbage spewed by SOME Christians as they judge and marginalize those they should aid. And you know what? I’ve heard the same garbage from some Jews. As for abortion as a solution to poverty, I said no such thing. But forced childbirth is certainly a contributor to poverty. My point was that you can’t force women to have kids knowing that those kids will suffer unless you are prepared to address that suffering.
Why don’t you understand a simple statement about adoption and religious Christians? You called religious Christians judgmental snobs not interested in social justice or living (born?) babies or mothers. I just countered you completely.
And it’s even worse that you are *JUDGING* people, clearly judging people and their entire perspective, without even knowing any?? Um…can you start to reach out to meet people before you waste all our time with your big thoughts? —no sorry, that’s harsh. I don’t think you as a Jewish person should engage in hearsay bigotry, but become educated through actual encounters with other people.
Finally…
If you think it through…reallllll deep…you’ll understand how your thinking is that abortion is a solution to poverty. Killing off the babies of the poor is the solution to poverty. Killing someone’s unwanted human when she has no options is a solution to that person’s poverty or internal anguish of not wanting that baby.
"I don't think you as a Jewish person should engage in hearsay bigotry"? Just who do you think you are? Certainly you are not a Jesuit. The arrogance you display on this thread is astounding. Maybe you are pro birth, not pro life. "I'm sorry...do you know who she is?" You've got some gall.
Aborting a fetus that is past 22 weeks is murder plain and simple. I cannot fathom anyone who thinks it is okay to abort past the very beginning of pregnancy. An 8, 9 month fetus can live very well outside the womb. That is murder and is disgusting and immoral. Give the baby up for adoption. AND BTW I AM PRO CHOICE WITH LIMITS. As an RN in the OR, I have been witness to many terminations.
For what? You seem misguided. When my mother, a lifelong Catholic, and I would drive by a "right to life" demonstration at the local Planned Parenthood, she'd say "pull over, I want to say something to them". She'd ask the men holding up dumb signs if they've volunteered at a Children's Hospital. Of course they've not. The women were just as offensive.
The guy you spoke to probably had a sick child at home. Or had helped his wife carry their preterm baby to its grave. Or etc etc etc… A lot of these people know the insides of a children’s hospital verrrry well. But you didn’t ask, did you?
Did I mention something about judging those whose crosses you don’t know, earlier?
This is one of the knottiest problems we face. There are no simple answers. I used to be prochoice but have since become antiabortion. I believe it is murder. However, I will never tell a woman what to do nor will I condemn her.
It is a terrible choice a woman has to make. I am against abortion but I also have compassion for a woman making that choice.
I agree however I cannot support any woman waiting that long to make this decision because you are killing a living being. If you are going to abort do it early. The pregnancy tests are very sensitive and we have the morning after pill.
But it's simply not your choice to make. It is the choice of the woman carrying the fetus and we cannot be knowing of the obstacles she faces. It's not our place to judge that woman.
I don’t think people today want to judge the woman at all. In fact the most ardent pro-life women have had abortions themselves, and don’t want society to do this to other innocent young girls. The fact is abortion is an option where there is no perceived option. Of desperation, abandonment, fear. God wants to find you and hold you in a place of hope, trust, goodness and beauty. Mercy, forgiveness. The pro-life active women I know want the same for every woman.
Hi, LP, you’re spot on. The Catholic Church is growing where it stays firm on the principles and teachings that the rest of the Christian world threw away and went with the flow of “the World.” It is growing *because* it stands firm on these principles, it stands on Jesus Christ where it stands on these principles and does not compromise with what “the World” throws away, does not understand, or finds inconvenient.
The problem is it is being led now by men with too much faith in “worldly wisdom.”
Our (faithful Catholics’) response basically is to know that nothing happens, even this, without God’s permission. So we watch and pray and work faithfully.
My pastor is a convert priest, a Yale Divinity grad former Episcopalian pastor who gave up a six-figure endowment for himself, wife, and three kids because the Catholic Church’s claim on history, teaching, steadfastness, was too compelling to ignore in good faith. He gave it all up to jump from the Thames to the Tiber, and walks the “life principles” walk too, with 11 kids now, as a Catholic priest. And he is not alone. Masses of intellectual Protestants pouring into a newly formed diocese called, in North America, the Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter. And these pastors are on fire. Knowledgeable, convicted, real. And our parish is booming, where mainstream Roman rite parishes are shriveling up cluelessly as the Bishop tries more and more gimmicks.
Intellectual Protestant Christians become Catholic Christians.
Ignorant (of their Catechism, history, teaching, Bible) Catholics…become protestant…or nones.
Jesus Christ came to be the Light of a verrrry dark and barbaric world.
He not only taught us to love each other, but He taught us that to love is Divine and we have a destiny to have a *relationship* with Love Himself.
Christianity experiences its fullness in the Catholic Church; Christianity itself is not merely a set of teachings or rules from a life guru but a relationship with God Himself that can go as deep as we allow it!
Polecat, should religion not make one's life better? Or should it hinder that life? Divorce is not recognized by the Church, but should one stay married simply because of that "rule"? Divorce is considered a serious offense, but should a Catholic stay married simply because of this rule? How does that help one? How does that help society?
Theresa, I am not a Catholic. In fact I am not religious at all. But if you are a member of a club with strict rules, you either follow those rules or you leave or get thrown out.
So Catholicism is a club? I agree. It's a big club and one pays to become a member. That's the case, I believe, with just about every religion. It'd be nice if Catholic priests and bishops would follow the rules, too. The Catholic church is arguably the worse offender when it comes to sex abuse directed at children.
No, I did not block you. I would never have done. I did block another person on this thread. It's strange, because when I did block that person, the "blocking feature" did not seem to work. i.e., I still saw that person's comments. I suspect some technical difficulties exist. I would never have wanted to block you.
Theresa, the Church’s teachings on marriage are “hard” because Jesus Christ Himself taught it and one doesn’t claim to believe in and worship Him selectively…
But Jesus Christ also *knew* these teachings would be hard on us. The world was dark and barbaric without Him and little has changed under the sun. The same conditions of people apply which make marriage hard. Selfishness, lust, hardness of heart, sin. Jesus promised us, though that if we followed Him— *no matter how hard it got* — and He went all the way to Crucifixion— He would be with us and give us the Life we need.
There is so much more to living the Catholic faith…!
A great resource that’ll make you mad, then glad, is Fr. Chris Alar, and the Divine Mercy YouTube channel.
Please know I’m not judging you regarding marriage or your thoughts at all. I just want to make this clear. Thanks. Godspeed.
Thank you for your polite response. How good it must be to live your life, in a healthy way, practicing the Catholic faith. Some of us have found that theory is all well and good, but practice is something entirely different. In fact, some have experienced the Catholic Church to do more damage than good. Peace to you.
Umm...okay. I'm sorry that you interpret my response to be judgmental. Quite the contrary - I express gladness that you have found the Catholic faith to be one that works for you. I mean that sincerely. Thanks, but maybe I'll talk to my Rabbi or the Unitarian Minister. btw, I'm not your honey.
“Not your honey…” ouch. Clearly you have a giant chip on your shoulder. Wound in your heart. Even though you are trying to return my feeling. It’s ok.
But…I know this is just an assertion from a stranger… but… you’re still not going to find the true love you’re seeking anywhere but Jesus Christ. God bless you again.
He still is alive today and still champions those marginalized… which would include alllll lives He created for a purpose which we have no moral right to make and then take…
Lonesome, I have no real standing in this. I am not religious in any way. But in a weird way I think Francis might be practicing old fashioned marketing. (You know, like in capitalism).
By which I mean he’s reading the tea leaves in America. Abortion is not a constitutional right any more in this country, but regardless of how he personally feels about it, he realizes that the majority of American women support access to it in some way. If he wants more adherents to the Catholic Church, why not support the access to abortion to get some of them?
Because it isn't really the Catholic Church if it supports abortion. Kind of like if they start reading Dr. Seuss instead of Scripture, it isn't really the Catholic Church. Or if they begin to worship Rupaul, instead of God, it isn't really Catholic Church.
You can't read "To Kill a Mockingbird," "Catcher in the Rye", "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings", Harry Potter and I'm pretty sure the biblical Song of Solomon. The right wingnuts have banned them.
" Formal cooperation with abortion results in automatic excommunication. To my knowledge, Biden has not formally cooperated with abortion." You didn't look very far, did you?
It certainly isn't kind to the fetus, a small undeveloped human being who in a few months will be fully developed but will not get that chance because it was murdered.
Except that the fetus is not a human being - it has the potential to become one. The fetus is not a human being until it lives outside of a woman's body. A fetus does not have the same rights as does a human being.
If you take a swab of cells off a human fetus and ask a biologist to tell you what animal is this, the biologist will say human. That fetus is a human being it is not fully developed yet but it is human, not a lizard, not a dog, human.
Really? Not always. Not always 46 chromosomes. But that's not the point. You choose to believe it's a full human being, ok. But it's not anyone's right to impose that belief upon another.
Well said. And I think your conclusion "often underpinned by a pernicious form of hopelessness" is right. (I had to look up the definition of pernicious).
I am no stranger to hopelessness, and I have worked to leave it behind, which, for me, means being willing to put everything in God's hands, including relationships, worry, and the future.
I think I would be even more pointed than you, on reflection. I would say that these human judgements... are underpinned by hopelessness.
I was raised a Catholic. It's not evil, and I'd be willing to bet the farm that an appreciable, if not majority, of Catholics want to keep abortion safe and legal. Many are afraid to speak up in public because it's such a polarizing issue and older Catholics, especially those of my mother's generation, are afraid of the clergy.
I agree with every word you wrote. The Catholics i know ate wonderful, and yes, most believe as I do: the only person who should decide to abort or keep is the woman with the pregnancy. What religionbelieves is fine, but they do not govern in America, or shouldn’t. Thanks.
As usual off topic. Watch this to the end if it doesn't jerk a tear out of you, you have no soul. This story renews my faith in humanity. Under crushing evil some good prevailed.
There are some of us that are good, even some Democrats.
I'm not either. I argue that the Church has certain hard rules it claims to follow. If they impose these rules on the faithful but do not enforce them then they are hypocrites, hollow.
In the Catholic Church, who makes the rules clergy must obey? The pope? If so, then these priests are disobeying the boss and that brings consequences.
Thanks for this, Polecat. That's the real question I have: who makes the rules by which the clergy must abide? The pope on his own? A board of cardinals? Either, depending on the issue? That answer would determine whether the priests can (or can't) defy the pope without censure or termination.
I agree that some faithful feel they've been betrayed by Francis, but point out that there are just as many faithful who feel the opposite. It all comes down to who has the power to make and/or change doctrine.
Schisms have come for lesser reasons. Maybe we'll see one in our lifetimes. I hear Constantinople is pretty this time of year :-)
There is a word that describes when the pope speaks for God. Back when I was taking European History, I knew what it was called but can't dredge it up. Something to do with infallibility.
Again, only the Truth is black and white." No truth is relative. 500 years ago, scientific truth said blood flowed with the tides and the Earth was the center of the universe.
The subject of today's post is what does the Catholic Church consider truth. The Church has considered abortion a mortal sin for hundreds of years.
"Abortion—Human life begins at conception in the mother’s womb. For God tells us, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew thee, and before you were born I consecrated you” (Jeremiah 1:5). Abortion is therefore murder. The oldest Christian book (besides parts of the Bible) is the Didache, a book composed by the twelve apostles or their disciples. The Didache proclaims the ancient teaching of the Catholic Church, “You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish” (Didache 2,2). All Catholics who procure a completed abortion or participate in execution of an abortion are automatically excommunicated from the Catholic Church (CCC 2272 and CIC Canon 1314)."
So why did the Pope kiss the ever senile Joe's ass and not excommunicate him?
Please do not go off on a tangent and give me a straight answer.
Also, one thing is the doctrinal position, the theology, and another is the pastoral approach. What’s the end goal here? Condemning the sinners? Or is it leading them to conversion? The doctrine has not changed nor will ever change. But bringing people to accept it requires an incline plane, a ramp, towards the Truth.
"Church catechesis in the US has long been abysmal . . ." following immediately after "[I]t presumes to know the hearts and minds of all Catholics . . ." is pretty rich. At least throw in an "I think", "it seems to me" or an "IMO" otherwise you are committing the exact offense you find objectionable.
He may be about Catholicism. That is not my religion so I won't opine. But my point was that he is doing what he is critical of others for doing. There is a lot of that on here of late about a wide variety of topics. That includes your "everybody knows it". That shows a complete disregard for those with differing perspectives.
I am not easily offended and was not at all by your comment. You weighed in on something I said and I responded. No lecture intended. I stand by the comment.
It's so strange to hear someone speak about Pope Francis being a sellout. The Catholic Church is staggeringly behind the times. It needs to be revamped. It's becoming an archaic fossil and young people don't feel attached to it. Sure, there's comfort in ritual, but only if one grows up within its confines. - something becoming ever less popular. Who really believes that only men should be priests? Why? Because Jesus was a man? That's absurd in this day and age. What young person trusts a priest with their personal problems?
I was a huge Sam fan, right until his Trump derangement syndrome made him nuts. His covid views are nuts. Don't get me wrong, I hate Trump, but it didn't make me go all nuts like it did him. I mean, he used to be all about "engage with all view points" to during covid favoring censorship and de-platforming. I mean, talk about a 180! He's really lost it.
No, I understood. But I'm just saying living in CA is no excuse. Trust me, Boston is every bit as bad as CA. It's August 2023, and I STILL see lots of people masking, including young adults! Sam claims to be a free thinker, and living in CA is no excuse for losing your ability to think critically. He's just ... I dunno, a shell of his former self.
Maybe my husband saw something in Sam that I missed at the beginning. He could never stand Sam.
Ah, I see. I have one of his books, because I had similar, but not nearly as fully developed ideas about moral development and the psychology of religion years ago when I studied psychology. I appreciate and respect what he has done for our culture, but I wish he could find a way to step back and crosscheck his own current attitudes with his own past good work. Even I, who cried when Trump was first elected, have come to feel some degree of solidarity with Trump voters and feel the frustration of being abused in their workplaces by liberals. I've been abused by disingenuous interpretations of my words. The borrowing of words from trade specific lexicons to use in lay contexts as political weapons of psychological warfare is totally maddening. Someone should lay it out for Sam Harris, leaving no room for interpretation. Example: 'field' is not racist and 'phobia' is a reflexive reaction, not a rationale. Liberal academics are using students to wield words as weapons. It has happened to me in numerous occasions and both at work and in my personal life. Sorry, I'm not a gal of few words😁
You know, it's O.K. not to "hate Trump" (or anybody else). Part of the totalitarian "woke" psyop is the mass projection of hate and the "othering" (gleeful cancellation) of pretend boogie men. The trapped, manipulated and handled Biden, Feinstein Et al, deserve our concern and pity. Our legitimate anger and censure should be at those pulling the strings. Allowing personal compassion for ourselves might be a good first step in clearing our vision and the start of the healing we need.
Thank you for saying, “It’s ok not to ‘hate Trump.’” It’s like the last standing passcode amongst People Who Used To Vote D or something. But it is more than Ok not to hate Trump. It’s ok to love him as a president. I do. There, I said it!!
I had never heard of the guy, but I saw the interview where he said that he wouldn't care if Hunter Biden had bodies in his basement. He represents the True Woke Faith.
Agreed. I don't care what you believe if you are willing to engage openly with difference. He lost that ability, if indeed he every honestly had it. It may have always been simply a posture he found himself unable to maintain under pressure.
It is all good sport to attack the worst actions among believers. Harris does it, as did Hitchens. Some day, we will pull the lens back to wide-angle and remind ourselves that all human beings have worldviews and belief systems. By their fruits, we shall know them. In the space of time, a few thousand years is but a second.
Nazism was heavily buttressed by support among biologists in all the leading German universities, who were heavily invested both in Eugenics and ideas of racial hierarchy.
Does the use of science to support genocide then logically permit me to attack Science per se?If the whole is defined by the worst aspects of the parts, the answer is obviously yes. But unlike Harris, I understand that would be stupid.
Sam Harris is a master of straw man arguments. I think that has been clear in both his comments and your hypothetical. Science does not support genocide or eugenics, nor does it support keeping children home from school for a year or imperiling the lives of many poor and marginalized who rely on carbon energy to power their car, heat their home, and support their economy before we adopt truly "sustainable" strategies that displace carbon without brute force.
Sadly, our political moment will not countenance subtle argument like the one you have presented. So we keep our hands on each others' throats.
"The medical profession has wrestled with the significance of the Doctors Trial. For instance, to observe its 50th anniversary, the British Medical Journal printed a special issue (free downloads here). The lead article “War crimes and medical science” warned that the Nazi problems were “not unique to one place or time, and could happen here” and the trial “left us with a legacy we still shrink from confronting.” It pointed to contemporary problems in American medicine and warned “there will always be imperatives that threaten the professional values we profess to hold so dear” and “the profession of medicine carries within it the seeds of its own destruction.”
Ah the anti-Semitic trope.. Not relevant. He was simply pointing out that many Reform Temples are embracing the same empty leftist dogma as are many Protestant Churches, and now elements of the Catholic Church, itself. Many Conservative and Orthodox rabbis and congregants would wholly agree with him.
Orthodox, yes, but Conservative Temples where I live are struggling and have started to adopt some of the woke nonsense and “every cause but their own” attitude of the Reform movement.
Current Jersey Girl here. Same situation, but I was trying to keep my answer simple. I think the one Conservative synagogue in my town (vs. the four Orthodox ones plus multiple independent minyanim) is doing okay, but the rabbi chose to insert himself into a recent political situation, and surprise, surprise, took the leftist position.
Not sure what your point is but as someone who is Jewish I often pose the question to other Jews if they believe in God. It often leads to a very interesting conversation ( for those willing to engage). It also begs the question what makes something a religion, a question that can delve into lots of subquestons that I am more than happy to discuss
I like the old black and white interview with C.G. Jung (on YouBoob) who, when ask'd if he believed in God said with a smile: "I don't believe, I know."
Michael, I, too, have posed those same questions, to Jews who no longer believe in God and to my growing number of friends who are searching for something surpassing belief. The conversations are interesting, to be sure. As I have grown older, belief is about how my belief shapes my life, relationships with others, and my relationship with the countless things for which our world has few satisfying answers. My comment was more an expression of sadness for, without the Jews' belief in God, I (and billions of other Abrahamic believers) would have no mooring. Nor, for that matter, would much of this world if counterfactuals are to be entertained. I like to think that you and I can differ on certain things relating to how we see God while still clinging to the hope that His revelation holds more hope in our shared human project. I worry about a world without Jewish believers, already a vanishingly small number globally, as much as I worry about the intramural squabbles in churches. My late wife was ever-confident that God can handle it, her faith unmoved unto death.
Jews who don't believe in God are Jewish. Their kids won't be Jewish if said Jews has children with a female non-Jew. There's an over 50% assimilation rate among reform Jews and Jews of no faith, while plenty of them are not having any kids at all. Orthodox Jews on the other hand tend to have over 4 kids and are growing at an exponential rate, and retain far more adherents to the faith, and will probably surpass Jewish non believers in the coming decades though right now only making up about 10-15% of Jews worldwide.
Wait so what does this have to do with the article?
As a thought. Science has proven/reports that on the subatomic level particles know when they're being looked at and can actually change their behavior in response. The experience of consciousness requires a knower and a known. If it doesn't exist in consciousness for most practical purposes it doesn't exist. If the smallest particles of reality, are capable of knowing they're being tampered with, the universe is conscious and alive.
We are finite creatures who spring from, and exist in, what is for us, an eternity. The idea that we have no relationship with that, or that it has no effect on what it means to be a human being is madness. Most religion and societies have evolved out of an attempt to come to terms with that fact and create a meaningful relationship to that experience. The human moral reason born out of that attempt creates lines of demarcation that allow civilization, order and possibility. Beyond those: chaos, war and the re-education camp.
To say Jew, Christian, Buddhist or name any religion is to speak to the cultural, ritual and social orders grown from that attempt. The American Constitution begins with the acknowledged fact that all men (women, people, he, she, it) spring directly from an eternal transcendent living creator which informs the reality of their existence and within the bounds of human moral reason aren't to be fk'd with.
Ritual is the container for myth. Myth informs the human concerning his relationship with the forces at play within the transcendent eternal (or so says Mircea Eliade). Jews (I'm not one/with all respect) have survived the pogroms, slaughters and Auschwitz because their belief/connection to a "living God", cultural history and meaningful myth and ritual. These are not theory, but real forces. This is a new age.
Sure, all of that may be true. But isn't it arrogant and egotistical to think that, because some power we could never possibly understand may be running the universe it therefore means that power loves us, or hates us or even thinks about us at all anymore than we think about ants crawling around outside or that such a power ensures we live forever in a magical place when we die?
And I certainly don't want ANY religion saying it is the "true faith" on which all our laws should be based. At present, 40% of people do not identify with a specific faith and that number is growing. The church parking lot in my town used to be full on Sunday, now there's about a dozen or so cars and mostly elderly people going inside. Why should that be the basis of any kind of government?
I'm saying that the soul (psyche) exists. That there are moral lines of demarcation that define what it is to be a human being, violation of which bring only chaos and consequence. That it's possible and important to acknowledge, develop a relationship and participate with, the living force that informs the fact of our personal as well as our cultural/mythological/civilizational existence.
Suzy, you no doubt know that the People of Israel are “those who wrestle with God“. This event should be celebrated, rather than viewed as threatening.
Speaking not as a Catholic, I have been much more impressed with the theological writings of Pope John Paul II and Pope Benedict XVI. For my money, Pope Francis is committing the same errors found on the liberal side of the Protestant churches, largely emptying with all manner of rainbows on their websites. Desperate to fill their churches, some Roman Catholic leaders are turning their faith into a large book group. This has been the temptation across the Jewish and Christian faiths, and too many of my Jewish friends have forsaken belief in God while clinging to the notion that they are somehow still Jewish. Is that not just a tribal claim? One that our woke culture should probe and think about more clearly? This is not a litmus test on homosexuality, abortion or any belief upon which people of conscience might differ but about retaining a sense of humility that confesses that we do not know what we do not know.
It is good that you have reported on this gathering, and I am no fan of mob ravings, either at a Catholic conference or a Bruce Springsteen concert. They become a bit unhinged and expose the animal spirits that lie beneath our better selves. However, not one of us should look with derision at the questions posed by these groups. Only time, and history, will bear out the Truth. I, for one, find these movements to be much more intellectually challenging than the “I’m OK, you’re OK” pablum of our post- modern age.
Ask Sam Harris about a future without God. He will probably say it is the unshackling of humanity and send you a link to his meditation app. Because, after all, he and his friends have real knowledge. Just ask him.
Who is Sam Harris?
In other words keep an open mind and don't hate the people that don't align with you. Now, why is this so hard to do?
"somehow still Jewish"? So you posit that a Jew that does not believe in God is not Jewish? I strongly disagree.
> too many of my Jewish friends have forsaken belief in God while clinging to the notion that they are somehow still Jewish
This is quite common among Quakers, too. Many Quakers who attend meeting every Sunday - probably more than half of those who are under 40 - are atheist or agnostic.
Well said, although I think conservative-leaning Catholics (myself among them) often fail to appreciate the importance of Pope Francis’ contributions to Church culture. They focus on and mischaracterize a handful of his remarks to the exclusion of his larger evangelization efforts which both conserve and expand upon Church tradition. People make mistakes when they approach Catholicism through the lense of the American political binary.
Francis has absolutely betrayed the faithful in China by giving the CCP authority to approve and appoint bishops.
I believe the Catholic Church has abandoned its most sacred principles. Abortion used to be a deadly sin. Now it seems to be OK with the church. Why else would the Pope suck up to the ever senile Joe and the Wicked Bitch of the West Nancy Pelosi instead of excommunicating them for supporting abortion?
It is either a sin or it isn't. To me it is black and white, no wriggle room. If it is a mortal sin, excommunicate them. If it isn't suck up to the leaders of abortion and that is exactly what this Pope did.
Many priests witnessed the poverty in Latin America and became communists. I believe Francis, an Argentine, was influenced by this. I'm not calling him communist but he is an anti-capitalist and very left wing.
Even after he was a cardinal, he lived in the poorest section of Buenos Aires and caught the bus to work every day. This is admirable but it also had to influence his thinking.
And you? How go you feel about poverty? Like Jesus did? Or like the shallow selfish people at this conference who have forgotten the social justice part of Catholicism, which Jesus gave more shits about than he did abortion.
Noah, you are changing the subject, diverting. The subject is abortion. How do you feel about abortion?
I’m fine with it. It’s sad but it’s a woman’s prerogative until the baby is born. It’s her body. And I’m not changing the subject, because abortion is all these churchy people care about — not social justice. Live babies? Live mothers? Poor mothers? No concern. In fact, religion for them is now a way to divide, to separate the worthy from the unworthy. It’s snobbery, it’s pathetic and it’s un-Christian.
Not true actually, Noah. I don’t think there are more adoptive parents and donors to crisis pregnancy centers than religious Christians. Do you? Thoug I’m sorry you’ve clearly had bad experiences with some Christians, that’s a pretty slanderous statement and mindlessly so.
But you seem to think abortion is a solution to poverty by this argument…
I don’t understand your statement about adoption. Are you saying religious Christians are the most generous supporters of adoption? That would be admirable, I agree. Now your assumption that I’ve had bad experiences with Christians is just kooky. What I’ve done is read about and listened to the garbage spewed by SOME Christians as they judge and marginalize those they should aid. And you know what? I’ve heard the same garbage from some Jews. As for abortion as a solution to poverty, I said no such thing. But forced childbirth is certainly a contributor to poverty. My point was that you can’t force women to have kids knowing that those kids will suffer unless you are prepared to address that suffering.
Why don’t you understand a simple statement about adoption and religious Christians? You called religious Christians judgmental snobs not interested in social justice or living (born?) babies or mothers. I just countered you completely.
And it’s even worse that you are *JUDGING* people, clearly judging people and their entire perspective, without even knowing any?? Um…can you start to reach out to meet people before you waste all our time with your big thoughts? —no sorry, that’s harsh. I don’t think you as a Jewish person should engage in hearsay bigotry, but become educated through actual encounters with other people.
Finally…
If you think it through…reallllll deep…you’ll understand how your thinking is that abortion is a solution to poverty. Killing off the babies of the poor is the solution to poverty. Killing someone’s unwanted human when she has no options is a solution to that person’s poverty or internal anguish of not wanting that baby.
Not even Mother Teresa advocated abortion.
I’m sorry…do you know who she is?
"I don't think you as a Jewish person should engage in hearsay bigotry"? Just who do you think you are? Certainly you are not a Jesuit. The arrogance you display on this thread is astounding. Maybe you are pro birth, not pro life. "I'm sorry...do you know who she is?" You've got some gall.
You’re really lonely, maybe?
Someone has a need for control here.
Non sequitur, ma’am. Or are you seeking to hijack?
Aborting a fetus that is past 22 weeks is murder plain and simple. I cannot fathom anyone who thinks it is okay to abort past the very beginning of pregnancy. An 8, 9 month fetus can live very well outside the womb. That is murder and is disgusting and immoral. Give the baby up for adoption. AND BTW I AM PRO CHOICE WITH LIMITS. As an RN in the OR, I have been witness to many terminations.
Maybe. If one gives birth to the Gerber baby. Sick, diseased children - not so much. And it happens all the time.
It's absolutely not common.
Many people give birth to less than healthy children.
Obviously. I'm not stupid. Let's not extrapolate that into rationales for abortion.
I’m sorry.
For what? You seem misguided. When my mother, a lifelong Catholic, and I would drive by a "right to life" demonstration at the local Planned Parenthood, she'd say "pull over, I want to say something to them". She'd ask the men holding up dumb signs if they've volunteered at a Children's Hospital. Of course they've not. The women were just as offensive.
The guy you spoke to probably had a sick child at home. Or had helped his wife carry their preterm baby to its grave. Or etc etc etc… A lot of these people know the insides of a children’s hospital verrrry well. But you didn’t ask, did you?
Did I mention something about judging those whose crosses you don’t know, earlier?
This is one of the knottiest problems we face. There are no simple answers. I used to be prochoice but have since become antiabortion. I believe it is murder. However, I will never tell a woman what to do nor will I condemn her.
It is a terrible choice a woman has to make. I am against abortion but I also have compassion for a woman making that choice.
No simple answers to complex problems.
I agree however I cannot support any woman waiting that long to make this decision because you are killing a living being. If you are going to abort do it early. The pregnancy tests are very sensitive and we have the morning after pill.
But it's simply not your choice to make. It is the choice of the woman carrying the fetus and we cannot be knowing of the obstacles she faces. It's not our place to judge that woman.
Sorry but I do not agree. A woman who aborts a healthy fetus is killing a living being. It's wrong. I will judge.
I don’t think people today want to judge the woman at all. In fact the most ardent pro-life women have had abortions themselves, and don’t want society to do this to other innocent young girls. The fact is abortion is an option where there is no perceived option. Of desperation, abandonment, fear. God wants to find you and hold you in a place of hope, trust, goodness and beauty. Mercy, forgiveness. The pro-life active women I know want the same for every woman.
I grew up on the low end of the pay scale. I did not grow up in the crushing poverty of developing nations but I was poor by US standards.
I could care less what Catholics do. However, if they have firm rules, which they do, and don't enforce them then they are hypocrites.
Hi, LP, you’re spot on. The Catholic Church is growing where it stays firm on the principles and teachings that the rest of the Christian world threw away and went with the flow of “the World.” It is growing *because* it stands firm on these principles, it stands on Jesus Christ where it stands on these principles and does not compromise with what “the World” throws away, does not understand, or finds inconvenient.
The problem is it is being led now by men with too much faith in “worldly wisdom.”
Our (faithful Catholics’) response basically is to know that nothing happens, even this, without God’s permission. So we watch and pray and work faithfully.
My pastor is a convert priest, a Yale Divinity grad former Episcopalian pastor who gave up a six-figure endowment for himself, wife, and three kids because the Catholic Church’s claim on history, teaching, steadfastness, was too compelling to ignore in good faith. He gave it all up to jump from the Thames to the Tiber, and walks the “life principles” walk too, with 11 kids now, as a Catholic priest. And he is not alone. Masses of intellectual Protestants pouring into a newly formed diocese called, in North America, the Ordinariate of the Chair of St. Peter. And these pastors are on fire. Knowledgeable, convicted, real. And our parish is booming, where mainstream Roman rite parishes are shriveling up cluelessly as the Bishop tries more and more gimmicks.
Intellectual Protestant Christians become Catholic Christians.
Ignorant (of their Catechism, history, teaching, Bible) Catholics…become protestant…or nones.
Jesus Christ came to be the Light of a verrrry dark and barbaric world.
He not only taught us to love each other, but He taught us that to love is Divine and we have a destiny to have a *relationship* with Love Himself.
Christianity experiences its fullness in the Catholic Church; Christianity itself is not merely a set of teachings or rules from a life guru but a relationship with God Himself that can go as deep as we allow it!
Polecat, should religion not make one's life better? Or should it hinder that life? Divorce is not recognized by the Church, but should one stay married simply because of that "rule"? Divorce is considered a serious offense, but should a Catholic stay married simply because of this rule? How does that help one? How does that help society?
Theresa, I am not a Catholic. In fact I am not religious at all. But if you are a member of a club with strict rules, you either follow those rules or you leave or get thrown out.
So Catholicism is a club? I agree. It's a big club and one pays to become a member. That's the case, I believe, with just about every religion. It'd be nice if Catholic priests and bishops would follow the rules, too. The Catholic church is arguably the worse offender when it comes to sex abuse directed at children.
Theresa, I tried to like your comment but got a message saying I was blocked from liking your message. Did you block me?
No, I did not block you. I would never have done. I did block another person on this thread. It's strange, because when I did block that person, the "blocking feature" did not seem to work. i.e., I still saw that person's comments. I suspect some technical difficulties exist. I would never have wanted to block you.
Well, I did like your comment.
Theresa, the Church’s teachings on marriage are “hard” because Jesus Christ Himself taught it and one doesn’t claim to believe in and worship Him selectively…
But Jesus Christ also *knew* these teachings would be hard on us. The world was dark and barbaric without Him and little has changed under the sun. The same conditions of people apply which make marriage hard. Selfishness, lust, hardness of heart, sin. Jesus promised us, though that if we followed Him— *no matter how hard it got* — and He went all the way to Crucifixion— He would be with us and give us the Life we need.
There is so much more to living the Catholic faith…!
A great resource that’ll make you mad, then glad, is Fr. Chris Alar, and the Divine Mercy YouTube channel.
Please know I’m not judging you regarding marriage or your thoughts at all. I just want to make this clear. Thanks. Godspeed.
Thank you for your polite response. How good it must be to live your life, in a healthy way, practicing the Catholic faith. Some of us have found that theory is all well and good, but practice is something entirely different. In fact, some have experienced the Catholic Church to do more damage than good. Peace to you.
Don’t judge me any more than you want me to judge you, honey. You don’t really know my crosses, do you? :)
—“Do you also want to leave?”
—“To whom would we go, Lord? You alone have the words to eternal life.” John 6
God be with you, Theresa, and may He heal you, through a good faithful priest, the sacraments, restored union with Him alone
May our Blessed Mother Mary hold you in her arms as she held me!!!
I’ll pray to my big sister in Heaven for you. St. Therese.
Umm...okay. I'm sorry that you interpret my response to be judgmental. Quite the contrary - I express gladness that you have found the Catholic faith to be one that works for you. I mean that sincerely. Thanks, but maybe I'll talk to my Rabbi or the Unitarian Minister. btw, I'm not your honey.
“Not your honey…” ouch. Clearly you have a giant chip on your shoulder. Wound in your heart. Even though you are trying to return my feeling. It’s ok.
But…I know this is just an assertion from a stranger… but… you’re still not going to find the true love you’re seeking anywhere but Jesus Christ. God bless you again.
If Jesus were alive today he would be a champion for those marginalized.
He still is alive today and still champions those marginalized… which would include alllll lives He created for a purpose which we have no moral right to make and then take…
You seem to have a God complex. Why don't you use your real name? What are you hiding? Obviously, something. Your rhetoric is quite odious.
Hi, Theresa! Wonder all you like! You’re the one back here looking for answers and conversation.
Please do reread my posts. I try to be thorough with my responses, and if you don’t like them…well… that doesn’t change anything.
I won’t be commenting here much longer, so I hope you find the answers and the love and the love and the peace you are searching for… really…
the Lord is so ready to forgive all our worst sins… He loves you so deeply and wants to heal you of all your wounds…
When I don’t answer here anymore, please look into the Divine Mercy YouTube channel.
There are many lousy priests. We both know. But when you find someone with true faith, you can feel it. Sorry if I can’t help you.
Divine Mercy YouTube channel.
See ya—
I hope he's helping you right now, because I think you need it.
We all do.
Lonesome, I have no real standing in this. I am not religious in any way. But in a weird way I think Francis might be practicing old fashioned marketing. (You know, like in capitalism).
By which I mean he’s reading the tea leaves in America. Abortion is not a constitutional right any more in this country, but regardless of how he personally feels about it, he realizes that the majority of American women support access to it in some way. If he wants more adherents to the Catholic Church, why not support the access to abortion to get some of them?
Anyway, that’s my useless two cents..
Because it isn't really the Catholic Church if it supports abortion. Kind of like if they start reading Dr. Seuss instead of Scripture, it isn't really the Catholic Church. Or if they begin to worship Rupaul, instead of God, it isn't really Catholic Church.
You can't read Dr. Seuss. The PC/Woke tyrants have banned it.
You can't read "To Kill a Mockingbird," "Catcher in the Rye", "I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings", Harry Potter and I'm pretty sure the biblical Song of Solomon. The right wingnuts have banned them.
Every book you name is freely available and easily obtained. If you really believe it, you just may be a “left wing nut”. 😎
DeSantis minions tried hard, in FL, to get such books, umm, marginalized...
https://www.ncregister.com/news/pope-francis-throwaway-culture-abortion?amp
It’s an interesting article. It appears Francis is trying to have it both ways.
You nailed it!
" Formal cooperation with abortion results in automatic excommunication. To my knowledge, Biden has not formally cooperated with abortion." You didn't look very far, did you?
https://www.cnn.com/2022/08/03/politics/joe-biden-abortion-executive-order/index.html
By what you just said, the ever senile Biden and Nancy should have been excommunicated.
The order was not awful. It was an act of kindness.
It certainly isn't kind to the fetus, a small undeveloped human being who in a few months will be fully developed but will not get that chance because it was murdered.
Except that the fetus is not a human being - it has the potential to become one. The fetus is not a human being until it lives outside of a woman's body. A fetus does not have the same rights as does a human being.
If you take a swab of cells off a human fetus and ask a biologist to tell you what animal is this, the biologist will say human. That fetus is a human being it is not fully developed yet but it is human, not a lizard, not a dog, human.
46 chromosomes.. it’s not an amoeba…
Really? Not always. Not always 46 chromosomes. But that's not the point. You choose to believe it's a full human being, ok. But it's not anyone's right to impose that belief upon another.
I disagree. What does the ever senile Joe have to do, sign it in blood?
Well said. And I think your conclusion "often underpinned by a pernicious form of hopelessness" is right. (I had to look up the definition of pernicious).
I am no stranger to hopelessness, and I have worked to leave it behind, which, for me, means being willing to put everything in God's hands, including relationships, worry, and the future.
I think I would be even more pointed than you, on reflection. I would say that these human judgements... are underpinned by hopelessness.
Is abortion a grave sin? A simple yes or no will do.
Not to me. But I'm not Catholic.
I was raised a Catholic. It's not evil, and I'd be willing to bet the farm that an appreciable, if not majority, of Catholics want to keep abortion safe and legal. Many are afraid to speak up in public because it's such a polarizing issue and older Catholics, especially those of my mother's generation, are afraid of the clergy.
I agree with every word you wrote. The Catholics i know ate wonderful, and yes, most believe as I do: the only person who should decide to abort or keep is the woman with the pregnancy. What religionbelieves is fine, but they do not govern in America, or shouldn’t. Thanks.
As usual off topic. Watch this to the end if it doesn't jerk a tear out of you, you have no soul. This story renews my faith in humanity. Under crushing evil some good prevailed.
There are some of us that are good, even some Democrats.
Just kidding about the Democrats.
https://www.facebook.com/BBCArchive/videos/1988-thats-life-sir-nicholas-winton/524868598192459/
Will watch!
Loved this video. Thanks for sharing.
It renews my faith in human kind.
I'm not either. I argue that the Church has certain hard rules it claims to follow. If they impose these rules on the faithful but do not enforce them then they are hypocrites, hollow.
In the Catholic Church, who makes the rules clergy must obey? The pope? If so, then these priests are disobeying the boss and that brings consequences.
If the boss doesn't follow canon law, then what? Previous popes have not only followed canon law but have proclaimed the law to be the will of God.
I don't believe all of this but the faithful do and they believe they have been betrayed by God's emissary on Earth, the Pope.
Thanks for this, Polecat. That's the real question I have: who makes the rules by which the clergy must abide? The pope on his own? A board of cardinals? Either, depending on the issue? That answer would determine whether the priests can (or can't) defy the pope without censure or termination.
I agree that some faithful feel they've been betrayed by Francis, but point out that there are just as many faithful who feel the opposite. It all comes down to who has the power to make and/or change doctrine.
Schisms have come for lesser reasons. Maybe we'll see one in our lifetimes. I hear Constantinople is pretty this time of year :-)
There is a word that describes when the pope speaks for God. Back when I was taking European History, I knew what it was called but can't dredge it up. Something to do with infallibility.
I'll rephrase. Is an abortion of convenience a sin? Yes or no.
Again, only the Truth is black and white." No truth is relative. 500 years ago, scientific truth said blood flowed with the tides and the Earth was the center of the universe.
The subject of today's post is what does the Catholic Church consider truth. The Church has considered abortion a mortal sin for hundreds of years.
"Abortion—Human life begins at conception in the mother’s womb. For God tells us, “Before I formed you in the womb I knew thee, and before you were born I consecrated you” (Jeremiah 1:5). Abortion is therefore murder. The oldest Christian book (besides parts of the Bible) is the Didache, a book composed by the twelve apostles or their disciples. The Didache proclaims the ancient teaching of the Catholic Church, “You shall not kill the embryo by abortion and shall not cause the newborn to perish” (Didache 2,2). All Catholics who procure a completed abortion or participate in execution of an abortion are automatically excommunicated from the Catholic Church (CCC 2272 and CIC Canon 1314)."
So why did the Pope kiss the ever senile Joe's ass and not excommunicate him?
Please do not go off on a tangent and give me a straight answer.
Abortion is a sin. But the one doing/receiving abortion is a human whose conscience you cannot read not judge. Only God judges.
The Catholic Church is not the NCR. Use the Catechism to answer your questions, not the media which strives to create confusion.
Whose sin is it? For Catholics, maybe. How about for others? Is it a sin then as well?
I respectfully disagree. You either obey the law or you don't. If you don't obey the law, then suffer to consequences.
Also, one thing is the doctrinal position, the theology, and another is the pastoral approach. What’s the end goal here? Condemning the sinners? Or is it leading them to conversion? The doctrine has not changed nor will ever change. But bringing people to accept it requires an incline plane, a ramp, towards the Truth.
"Church catechesis in the US has long been abysmal . . ." following immediately after "[I]t presumes to know the hearts and minds of all Catholics . . ." is pretty rich. At least throw in an "I think", "it seems to me" or an "IMO" otherwise you are committing the exact offense you find objectionable.
Nah. Will Remmes is spot on and I believe everyone knows it.
He may be about Catholicism. That is not my religion so I won't opine. But my point was that he is doing what he is critical of others for doing. There is a lot of that on here of late about a wide variety of topics. That includes your "everybody knows it". That shows a complete disregard for those with differing perspectives.
Thanks for the lecture. Sorry that common speak is offensive to you, but I will try harder. Maybe lighten up?
I am not easily offended and was not at all by your comment. You weighed in on something I said and I responded. No lecture intended. I stand by the comment.
Thanks, Lynne.
It's so strange to hear someone speak about Pope Francis being a sellout. The Catholic Church is staggeringly behind the times. It needs to be revamped. It's becoming an archaic fossil and young people don't feel attached to it. Sure, there's comfort in ritual, but only if one grows up within its confines. - something becoming ever less popular. Who really believes that only men should be priests? Why? Because Jesus was a man? That's absurd in this day and age. What young person trusts a priest with their personal problems?
I respectfully disagree with your assessment.
I had some respect for Sam Harris for a time. But he lost me quite a while ago. He appears emotionally stable, but he isn't.
Sam Harris is pompous and without humility and smug too boot. Who would ever listen to him ?
Your comment is so good - it's worth saving to describe any number of people that come to mind.
So softly saying insane shit in a calm voice doesn’t do it for ya?
I was a huge Sam fan, right until his Trump derangement syndrome made him nuts. His covid views are nuts. Don't get me wrong, I hate Trump, but it didn't make me go all nuts like it did him. I mean, he used to be all about "engage with all view points" to during covid favoring censorship and de-platforming. I mean, talk about a 180! He's really lost it.
The thought patterns you describe could be attributable to socio-geographical influence.
perhaps, but I'm from Boston, and did not succumb to the group think here.
Oh, you thought I was referring to you? I was referring to Sam Harris living in CA and having a uniquely Californian filter of the world.
No, I understood. But I'm just saying living in CA is no excuse. Trust me, Boston is every bit as bad as CA. It's August 2023, and I STILL see lots of people masking, including young adults! Sam claims to be a free thinker, and living in CA is no excuse for losing your ability to think critically. He's just ... I dunno, a shell of his former self.
Maybe my husband saw something in Sam that I missed at the beginning. He could never stand Sam.
Ah, I see. I have one of his books, because I had similar, but not nearly as fully developed ideas about moral development and the psychology of religion years ago when I studied psychology. I appreciate and respect what he has done for our culture, but I wish he could find a way to step back and crosscheck his own current attitudes with his own past good work. Even I, who cried when Trump was first elected, have come to feel some degree of solidarity with Trump voters and feel the frustration of being abused in their workplaces by liberals. I've been abused by disingenuous interpretations of my words. The borrowing of words from trade specific lexicons to use in lay contexts as political weapons of psychological warfare is totally maddening. Someone should lay it out for Sam Harris, leaving no room for interpretation. Example: 'field' is not racist and 'phobia' is a reflexive reaction, not a rationale. Liberal academics are using students to wield words as weapons. It has happened to me in numerous occasions and both at work and in my personal life. Sorry, I'm not a gal of few words😁
You know, it's O.K. not to "hate Trump" (or anybody else). Part of the totalitarian "woke" psyop is the mass projection of hate and the "othering" (gleeful cancellation) of pretend boogie men. The trapped, manipulated and handled Biden, Feinstein Et al, deserve our concern and pity. Our legitimate anger and censure should be at those pulling the strings. Allowing personal compassion for ourselves might be a good first step in clearing our vision and the start of the healing we need.
Thank you for saying, “It’s ok not to ‘hate Trump.’” It’s like the last standing passcode amongst People Who Used To Vote D or something. But it is more than Ok not to hate Trump. It’s ok to love him as a president. I do. There, I said it!!
I had never heard of the guy, but I saw the interview where he said that he wouldn't care if Hunter Biden had bodies in his basement. He represents the True Woke Faith.
Agreed. I don't care what you believe if you are willing to engage openly with difference. He lost that ability, if indeed he every honestly had it. It may have always been simply a posture he found himself unable to maintain under pressure.
I think he got lost in an echo chamber and hasn't been able to find his way out.
aren't those called "ECO-chambers", now"? :-)
Lol--good one.
It is all good sport to attack the worst actions among believers. Harris does it, as did Hitchens. Some day, we will pull the lens back to wide-angle and remind ourselves that all human beings have worldviews and belief systems. By their fruits, we shall know them. In the space of time, a few thousand years is but a second.
Harris and Hitch had a mildly transgressive brand and for a time it sold books. Nothing more..
Nazism was heavily buttressed by support among biologists in all the leading German universities, who were heavily invested both in Eugenics and ideas of racial hierarchy.
Does the use of science to support genocide then logically permit me to attack Science per se?If the whole is defined by the worst aspects of the parts, the answer is obviously yes. But unlike Harris, I understand that would be stupid.
Sam Harris is a master of straw man arguments. I think that has been clear in both his comments and your hypothetical. Science does not support genocide or eugenics, nor does it support keeping children home from school for a year or imperiling the lives of many poor and marginalized who rely on carbon energy to power their car, heat their home, and support their economy before we adopt truly "sustainable" strategies that displace carbon without brute force.
Sadly, our political moment will not countenance subtle argument like the one you have presented. So we keep our hands on each others' throats.
"Science does not support genocide or eugenics" This is tricky. Maybe science corrupted by people/politics does? Please see:
https://pitt.substack.com/p/echoes-of-eugenics-what-the-doctors
"The medical profession has wrestled with the significance of the Doctors Trial. For instance, to observe its 50th anniversary, the British Medical Journal printed a special issue (free downloads here). The lead article “War crimes and medical science” warned that the Nazi problems were “not unique to one place or time, and could happen here” and the trial “left us with a legacy we still shrink from confronting.” It pointed to contemporary problems in American medicine and warned “there will always be imperatives that threaten the professional values we profess to hold so dear” and “the profession of medicine carries within it the seeds of its own destruction.”
“Because, after all, he and his friends have real knowledge. Just ask him.”
———————————————
Actually it’s a higher knowledge. A gnosis, if you will.
I’m kidding. They are just run-of-the-mill megalomaniacs.
Ah. Some of your best friends are Jews, eh.
Ah the anti-Semitic trope.. Not relevant. He was simply pointing out that many Reform Temples are embracing the same empty leftist dogma as are many Protestant Churches, and now elements of the Catholic Church, itself. Many Conservative and Orthodox rabbis and congregants would wholly agree with him.
And those Reform temples continue to close due to lack of membership, while the numbers of Orthodox Jews continues to grow.
Orthodox, yes, but Conservative Temples where I live are struggling and have started to adopt some of the woke nonsense and “every cause but their own” attitude of the Reform movement.
Current Jersey Girl here. Same situation, but I was trying to keep my answer simple. I think the one Conservative synagogue in my town (vs. the four Orthodox ones plus multiple independent minyanim) is doing okay, but the rabbi chose to insert himself into a recent political situation, and surprise, surprise, took the leftist position.
Baruch HaShem!!
You tell ‘em, AO. That person who disagrees with you is racist!!
🤡🤡🤡🤡🤡
Now I am confused.
Auto-da-fé time, gotta run.
Not sure what your point is but as someone who is Jewish I often pose the question to other Jews if they believe in God. It often leads to a very interesting conversation ( for those willing to engage). It also begs the question what makes something a religion, a question that can delve into lots of subquestons that I am more than happy to discuss
I like the old black and white interview with C.G. Jung (on YouBoob) who, when ask'd if he believed in God said with a smile: "I don't believe, I know."
I too know that God exists.
My favorite book on the subject”How to be Jewishif you dont believe in God”. Right next to theTorah
Alan, I cannot find it on AMZN. Is that the title or did the joke loft over my head?
Michael, I, too, have posed those same questions, to Jews who no longer believe in God and to my growing number of friends who are searching for something surpassing belief. The conversations are interesting, to be sure. As I have grown older, belief is about how my belief shapes my life, relationships with others, and my relationship with the countless things for which our world has few satisfying answers. My comment was more an expression of sadness for, without the Jews' belief in God, I (and billions of other Abrahamic believers) would have no mooring. Nor, for that matter, would much of this world if counterfactuals are to be entertained. I like to think that you and I can differ on certain things relating to how we see God while still clinging to the hope that His revelation holds more hope in our shared human project. I worry about a world without Jewish believers, already a vanishingly small number globally, as much as I worry about the intramural squabbles in churches. My late wife was ever-confident that God can handle it, her faith unmoved unto death.
Jews who don't believe in God are Jewish. Their kids won't be Jewish if said Jews has children with a female non-Jew. There's an over 50% assimilation rate among reform Jews and Jews of no faith, while plenty of them are not having any kids at all. Orthodox Jews on the other hand tend to have over 4 kids and are growing at an exponential rate, and retain far more adherents to the faith, and will probably surpass Jewish non believers in the coming decades though right now only making up about 10-15% of Jews worldwide.
Wait so what does this have to do with the article?
As a thought. Science has proven/reports that on the subatomic level particles know when they're being looked at and can actually change their behavior in response. The experience of consciousness requires a knower and a known. If it doesn't exist in consciousness for most practical purposes it doesn't exist. If the smallest particles of reality, are capable of knowing they're being tampered with, the universe is conscious and alive.
We are finite creatures who spring from, and exist in, what is for us, an eternity. The idea that we have no relationship with that, or that it has no effect on what it means to be a human being is madness. Most religion and societies have evolved out of an attempt to come to terms with that fact and create a meaningful relationship to that experience. The human moral reason born out of that attempt creates lines of demarcation that allow civilization, order and possibility. Beyond those: chaos, war and the re-education camp.
To say Jew, Christian, Buddhist or name any religion is to speak to the cultural, ritual and social orders grown from that attempt. The American Constitution begins with the acknowledged fact that all men (women, people, he, she, it) spring directly from an eternal transcendent living creator which informs the reality of their existence and within the bounds of human moral reason aren't to be fk'd with.
Ritual is the container for myth. Myth informs the human concerning his relationship with the forces at play within the transcendent eternal (or so says Mircea Eliade). Jews (I'm not one/with all respect) have survived the pogroms, slaughters and Auschwitz because their belief/connection to a "living God", cultural history and meaningful myth and ritual. These are not theory, but real forces. This is a new age.
Sure, all of that may be true. But isn't it arrogant and egotistical to think that, because some power we could never possibly understand may be running the universe it therefore means that power loves us, or hates us or even thinks about us at all anymore than we think about ants crawling around outside or that such a power ensures we live forever in a magical place when we die?
And I certainly don't want ANY religion saying it is the "true faith" on which all our laws should be based. At present, 40% of people do not identify with a specific faith and that number is growing. The church parking lot in my town used to be full on Sunday, now there's about a dozen or so cars and mostly elderly people going inside. Why should that be the basis of any kind of government?
I'm saying that the soul (psyche) exists. That there are moral lines of demarcation that define what it is to be a human being, violation of which bring only chaos and consequence. That it's possible and important to acknowledge, develop a relationship and participate with, the living force that informs the fact of our personal as well as our cultural/mythological/civilizational existence.
Well put.
Yes, including Jesus.
boom!