Religious Threadjacks

[neonzx]

OMG, am I going to prison? I told my kids (eventually)!

You TOLD them? I figured it out on my own... yeah, the tooth fairy was the parental units swapping my tooth for cash under my pillow.

[Sam the Centipede]

There is something amusingly absurd about a professional fantasist in gaudy robes and pointy hat complaining about stories concerning a man in a red suit and a furry hat. The Sermon On The Mount (Matthew 7:1-5) definitely applies!!

Yes, the bishop should apologize, for his hypocrisy and inconsistency, in omitting to apply the same standard of honesty to his trade!

[Suranis]

Uh, I hate to shock you, but dedicating your entire life to something "that does not exist" is not the same as pointing out that something everyone knows does not exist, doesn't. Nor does it make you a hypocrite. Because, you know, dedicating your entire life to something you don't believe in is rational.

And the fact that everyone is yelling at him to shut up about the fact that something does not exist and that he should continue to pretend that it does so that you can make lots of money mean that he is a "professional fantasist." And naturally you think HE is wrong for living a life dedicated to something he believes in rather than, everyone else living a life dedicated to something they don't believe in yet holds them prisoner and demands endless sacrifices.

And maybe he is putting the same standards that he lives by to this particular lie.

And the fact that You cant see that means you have blinkered vision.

TLDR People actually believe this stuff. No-one believes in Santa.

[neonzx]

Suranis..
The world would likely be a much better place if we tossed-aside childhood fantasies pounded into our heads..

[Suranis]

What, like Supply side economics?

Or the invisible hand of the Market? Or the lie that people thought the earth was flat in the Middle Ages? Or the lie that Columbus set out against the wishes of the Catholic church because he wanted to prove the Earth was a sphere? Because, you know, Atheists making shit up to prove religious people are stupid really proves religious people's stupidity. Not.

Ironically, the whole thing about understanding the universe through reason is very much a religious thing. St Thomas Aquinas wrote books all his life on thinking your way to understanding God though rational thought. Pascal wrote that Christianity was the only rational religion becasue it dealt with the universe as it is, and was entwined with mathematics.

Oh speaking of Pascal, Atheists saying that he said that "People do evil through Religious conviction" rather than what he actually said "people do evil most joyfully though a false principle of conscience." Again, you know, proving religions people are stupid by lying your ass off proves they are childish, not.

And people screaming at Churchmen to defend a lie is really rational, and proves that it's the Churchmen that are liars. Not.

Bottom line, I have my own reasons for believing, I have my own answers to the problem of evil, and I have my own proof that prayer works. And I'm not doing to discuss them becasue I don't feel like you lot leaping on one sentence to laugh at and pick apart, and ignoring the rest. Fuck that shit.

And the stupid lies that so called "Atheists" have to throw up does not convince me that I am the one that is childish, nor does it convince me that their so called rationality would make the world free-er or better.

Stop pounding satan Santa into little kids heads. You have absolute proof Santa is not real, yet you have websites tracking his course around the world.

[Estiveo]

Estiveoshot_20211215_182637.jpg

[Suranis]

[Suranis]

[poplove]

Since Suranis brought up Hallmark Christmas movies…

[poplove]

I can totally relate to these.

[Estiveo]

My brother Bosco once played Santa in a Christmas movie that'll likely never make it to hallmark.

Estiveoshot_20211216_052811.jpg

[Maybenaut]

I think it better to not subscribe to any man-made organized grift-based religions. --

And I certainly am not going to walk neighborhoods trying to "convert people", nor condemn them.

But that is just me. Walk your own path.

I took my 13yo granddaughter to NYC in October. Her mom’s Theravada Buddhist (her mom’s from Thailand), and her dad’s a dyed-in-the-wool atheist. Anyhoo, we were walking around NYC looking at the architecture and she saw that the doors to Saint Patrick’s cathedral were open and wanted to go in and look around. I was raised catholic, so I was able to explain everything we were looking at.

After we left we talked about religion and why people believe the things they do. She said something like, “I think religion is stupid,” and asked me what I thought. I told her that whatever she believed, she needed to understand that religion is a very important part of many people’s lives, and she really ought to take the time to learn about different religions, if for no other reason than to keep herself from sticking her foot in her mouth and showing her fellow human beings a little respect.

I told her that one fundamental thing that almost all religions have in common that she could get behind as a non-believer is a code of moral conduct. So whatever motivates a person to do the right thing - whether it’s the promise of a reward in the afterlife or something else - that’s not a bad thing.

[filly]

I think it better to not subscribe to any man-made organized grift-based religions. --

And I certainly am not going to walk neighborhoods trying to "convert people", nor condemn them.

But that is just me. Walk your own path.

I took my 13yo granddaughter to NYC in October. Her mom’s Theravada Buddhist (her mom’s from Thailand), and her dad’s a dyed-in-the-wool atheist. Anyhoo, we were walking around NYC looking at the architecture and she saw that the doors to Saint Patrick’s cathedral were open and wanted to go in and look around. I was raised catholic, so I was able to explain everything we were looking at.

After we left we talked about religion and why people believe the things they do. She said something like, “I think religion is stupid,” and asked me what I thought. I told her that whatever she believed, she needed to understand that religion is a very important part of many people’s lives, and she really ought to take the time to learn about different religions, if for no other reason than to keep herself from sticking her foot in her mouth and showing her fellow human beings a little respect.

I told her that one fundamental thing that almost all religions have in common that she could get behind as a non-believer is a code of moral conduct. So whatever motivates a person to do the right thing - whether it’s the promise of a reward in the afterlife or something else - that’s not a bad thing.

Brava!

She can learn about the perversions of the codes of moral conduct when she gets older. But you said exactly the right thing.

[poplove]

A4588992-7A7A-4265-B0B3-C3214EF9AFBF.jpeg (72.36 KiB) Viewed 2244 times

[MN-Skeptic]

A pastor baptized people for decades using one wrong word. Now those are all considered invalid

A Catholic priest has resigned after a church investigation found he performed invalid baptisms throughout most of his more than 20-year career, according to Bishop Thomas Olmsted of the Diocese of Phoenix.

Father Andres Arango, who performed thousands of baptisms, would say, "We baptize you in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit." But Olmsted explained the words "We baptize" should have been "I baptize" instead.

"The issue with using 'We' is that it is not the community that baptizes a person, rather, it is Christ, and Him alone, who presides at all of the sacraments, and so it is Christ Jesus who baptizes," Olmsted wrote in a message to parishioners posted last month.

The error also means that because baptism is the first of the sacraments, some people will need to repeat other sacraments, according to the diocese webpage for frequently asked questions. CNN has reached out to the diocese for comment on other sacraments.

Arango resigned as pastor of the St. Gregory Parish in Phoenix as of February 1.

"It saddens me to learn that I have performed invalid baptisms throughout my ministry as a priest by regularly using an incorrect formula. I deeply regret my error and how this has affected numerous people in your parish and elsewhere," Arango wrote in his own message on the site.

Olmsted said the Vatican's Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith in 2020 affirmed that when a baptism is conferred with the formula "We baptize ..." it is invalid and people need to be baptized again.

I'm sorry, but I've always felt that God is bright enough to understand our hearts and our intentions. I'm appalled at decisions like this. It's like, to the church, that the rite is a magic spell requiring magic words. Abracadabra. Say one thing wrong and God rejects it. Good grief. Is God really that stupid? Or that heartless?

[raison de arizona]

It only works if you use the correct magic words!

And Arizona, figures.

[keith]

I'm sorry, but I've always felt that God is bright enough to understand our hearts and our intentions.

Yes, It is.

I'm appalled at decisions like this.

Me too.

It's like, to the church, that the rite is a magic spell requiring magic words. Abracadabra. Say one thing wrong and God rejects it.

Yes. That is exactly the Roman Church's teaching.

Joseph Campbell pointed out that this is a significant difference between the Roman Church and the Protestant Churches in general. For example, it is important for the Roman Priest to have his back to the congregation when trans-mutating the wafer into the body of Christ. In the Roman Church this is not a metaphor, it is an actual miracle that literally transforms that bit of bread into the body of Christ. Only those anointed into service can observe such a miracle. Protestants, on the other hand believe it IS a metaphor, and the congregation needs to understand that there is nothing secret being withheld from the uninitiated, thus the Protestant minister faces the congregation during the transmutation rite.

Good grief. Is God really that stupid? Or that heartless?

Of course not. It's servants on Earth however...

[Kriselda Gray]

I'm sorry, but I've always felt that God is bright enough to understand our hearts and our intentions. I'm appalled at decisions like this. It's like, to the church, that the rite is a magic spell requiring magic words. Abracadabra. Say one thing wrong and God rejects it. Good grief. Is God really that stupid? Or that heartless?

Even most Witches aren't *that* fussy! In my 30 years in the Pagan and Heathen communities, I've found that by and large, Witches view the words and "ingredients" of a spell are tools to help you focus your mind on what it is you intend to have happen, and it is that intent which matters to the God(s)/ess(es).Magic is, at it's most basic, a kind of prayer with "props" (at least that's how I term it, some Witches are terribly fond of that kind of description) because what you're doing is asking the God(s)/ess(es) to use their power to help you achieve a specific goal . And, sure, you'll find Witches who do get hung up on the specific formulas and such, but I think you can find a wide range of opinions about how to pray (or otherwise communicate with that faith's God(s)/ess(es)) in just about any religion

I think what happened at that church is really tragic. Telling someone they have to be re-Baptized because the minister used a wrong word could cause a spiritual crisis for some parishioners. If they had been enjoying what they thought was a strong relationship with God, and that he was active in their lives, being told their baptism wasn't valid could make them question the validity of those experiences. That kind of a shock could lead some people to walk away from something that has possibly been a force for good in their lives, because even if religion is - as some here say - not real, the effects of following a religion can lead some people to live better lives and be better people than they might have been without it.

[Kriselda Gray]

Joseph Campbell pointed out that this is a significant difference between the Roman Church and the Protestant Churches in general. For example, it is important for the Roman Priest to have his back to the congregation when trans-mutating the wafer into the body of Christ. In the Roman Church this is not a metaphor, it is an actual miracle that literally transforms that bit of bread into the body of Christ. Only those anointed into service can observe such a miracle. Protestants, on the other hand believe it IS a metaphor, and the congregation needs to understand that there is nothing secret being withheld from the uninitiated, thus the Protestant minister faces the congregation during the transmutation rite.

That's really fascinating, thanks!

[MN-Skeptic]

Joseph Campbell pointed out that this is a significant difference between the Roman Church and the Protestant Churches in general. For example, it is important for the Roman Priest to have his back to the congregation when trans-mutating the wafer into the body of Christ. In the Roman Church this is not a metaphor, it is an actual miracle that literally transforms that bit of bread into the body of Christ. Only those anointed into service can observe such a miracle. Protestants, on the other hand believe it IS a metaphor, and the congregation needs to understand that there is nothing secret being withheld from the uninitiated, thus the Protestant minister faces the congregation during the transmutation rite.

I was raised Lutheran. My father's parents were Lutheran missionaries.

My husband was raised Catholic, went to a Catholic school through 8th grade. One of his vivid memories was a school morning communion where the priest happened to drop the wafer. A helpful young classmate proceeded to pick up the wafer and hand it back to the priest. The priest and teacher nun were horrified. A child had touched the host! But then, a few years later, it all changed and regular people could handle the communion wafers. That just puzzled my sweetie. Of course, his priest was appalled when my husband opted to attend the nearby Lutheran college. He was just as appalled when my sweetie married me in a Lutheran church.

[keith]

Joseph Campbell pointed out that this is a significant difference between the Roman Church and the Protestant Churches in general. For example, it is important for the Roman Priest to have his back to the congregation when trans-mutating the wafer into the body of Christ. In the Roman Church this is not a metaphor, it is an actual miracle that literally transforms that bit of bread into the body of Christ. Only those anointed into service can observe such a miracle. Protestants, on the other hand believe it IS a metaphor, and the congregation needs to understand that there is nothing secret being withheld from the uninitiated, thus the Protestant minister faces the congregation during the transmutation rite.

I was raised Lutheran. My father's parents were Lutheran missionaries.

My husband was raised Catholic, went to a Catholic school through 8th grade. One of his vivid memories was a school morning communion where the priest happened to drop the wafer. A helpful young classmate proceeded to pick up the wafer and hand it back to the priest. The priest and teacher nun were horrified. A child had touched the host! But then, a few years later, it all changed and regular people could handle the communion wafers. That just puzzled my sweetie. Of course, his priest was appalled when my husband opted to attend the nearby Lutheran college. He was just as appalled when my sweetie married me in a Lutheran church.

Yeah, I can't answer to changes made in Church doctrine since Campbell was writing in the 50' and 60's.

[Sam the Centipede]

[…] But then, a few years later, it all changed and regular people could handle the communion wafers. That just puzzled my sweetie. […]

One of the beauties of some churches and cults is that yesterday's Eternal Truth is not necessarily today's Eternal Truth!

Consubstantiation (the wafer and wine become goddish but remain cracker and plonk) seemed a reasonable approach to the Eucharist, given the starting point of priests prancing around in silly clothes.

But I wondered if the "miracle of transubstantiation" was a shibboleth for both priests and marks — clearly nothing has actually changed as the result of some guy muttering nonsense, but accepting this palpable untruth is a strong first step towards accepting other, possibly less implausible, facets of doctrine and policy?

[RTH10260]

A pastor baptized people for decades using one wrong word. Now those are all considered invalid

A Catholic priest has resigned after a church investigation found he performed invalid baptisms throughout most of his more than 20-year career, according to Bishop Thomas Olmsted of the Diocese of Phoenix.
.

Let the Vatican Gazpacho go out and track down all those unfaithfull and waterboard them until they return to bosom of the only right organzation.

I am sure that if they scrutinize the Romans they will still find some law and regulation that was not exactly followed and their martyr was not correctly executed and therefore cannot absolve them from all their sins

[Suranis]

For example, it is important for the Roman Priest to have his back to the congregation when trans-mutating the wafer into the body of Christ. In the Roman Church this is not a metaphor, it is an actual miracle that literally transforms that bit of bread into the body of Christ. Only those anointed into service can observe such a miracle. Protestants, on the other hand believe it IS a metaphor, and the congregation needs to understand that there is nothing secret being withheld from the uninitiated, thus the Protestant minister faces the congregation during the transmutation rite.

Correction, the Catholic Priest faces the congregation now, behind the alter. But its only been like 70 years since that change was made, cant expect Protestants to learn this stuff in such a short amount of time.

I cant really comment on the situation as we only have the Media's version of it which will be putting this in its worst possible light in order to kick some Catholics, but yes, the words ARE important, because that way everyone across the entire world is hearing the same rite, uniting the world in what is effectively a world wide united communion with Christ. I wouldn't have thought of this as a resigning offense, but again, all we have is the media laughing at those dumb Catholics, so there probably is more going on that we haven't been told.

[tek]

From my early days being extruded through the Catholic religion (my parents decided this was all bullshite when I was about 12 years old), the important thing about the transubstantiation is it meant we were getting close to the end of this damned Mass.

Didn't matter if the Mass was being said in English, Polish, or Latin; these universal signposts are important to a fourth-grader.