Of gods and language.

[Peter]

Folks, please read what I say and not just what you want to read in there. I have said nowhere that people in the Church have not done good work. I am talking about the institution as such and a lot of its edicts. If it were up to the Church, we would still believe the earth is flat. And yes, the Church still has an enormous influence on people, however much one may believe that people have a mind of their own. I never mentioned Africa or Asia anywhere in what I said, one needn't go any further than Ireland, or even think about how the Church, for years, has tried to cover up child abuse here in Europe and how scared people were to speak their mind.

I certainly am angry at religious institutions. I freely admit to that. I don't mind religion as such, the pontificating that these institutions do, however, is something I find at times hardly bareable. The 'we have the truth with us' and everyone else is wrong. Don't do this, because you'll go to hell. And that rule does not just apply to those who believe that truth, but also for guys like me, who don't. Fine by me if someone thinks euthanasia is wrong. But why should they determine how I am to lead my life? Did I ever vote for them? Did I ever even ask their opinion?

That is what I am pointing out. Nothing more, nothing less. The Church in these parts, the Islamic Ayatollahs elsewhere, none of them have been elected to tell us what to do. Still, and despite claims made in this thread, they have a massive influence on people's lives, both of their own faith and of another (or non-believers).

I'm glad we have moved forward a little in that you do at least acknowledge the Catholic church has done good - also there are few Catholics who wouldn't agree with you in condemning the wrongs that were done in the past in the name of the Church - read the words of Pope John Paul II or Pope Francis on this.

Your post though again overlooks the enormous contribution to science and education made by Catholics: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholi...ch_and_science.

OK you object to the moral teachings of the Catholic church, that is your own choice and no one is denying you that. You presumably do lead your life as you wish, so why so angry? You say we don't have to look further than Ireland - what do you mean? The violence has nothing to do with the Church which is opposed to all forms of violence, hatred and intolerance. The violence comes from people justifying themselves according to their own values. From an atheistic point of view there can be nothing wrong with this, because this is precisely what atheists claim we should do - live our lives according to our own values. Thus we arrive at the only logical conclusion as defined by Dostoevsky in the Brothers Karamazov and put into action by the Nazis and Communists “If God did not exist, everything is permitted”.

[Chris]

If it were up to the Church, we would still believe the earth is flat.

This is patently ridiculous. Human beings knew the earth was not flat before the Catholic Church even existed.

[AeolianHarp]

I understand you Albert. I am spiritual but an athiest in the sense I don't believe in God.

I have to listen to evangelists shouting hell fire and other nasty things in my city centre. They have shouted unpleasant things such as :

Women are unclean.

Jesus is haunting you now and he will be haunting you when you are dead.

Fornicators will go to hell!

At the last one I said to a passerby:

"How nice, we have Jesus and the utility companies haunting us! Hardly cheers one up on a cold day!"

They also have placards with the words whoredom on them in the street.

This is supposed to be the twenty first century not the 1600s..

[Albert Gans]

Folks, please read what I say and not just what you want to read in there. I have said nowhere that people in the Church have not done good work. I am talking about the institution as such and a lot of its edicts. If it were up to the Church, we would still believe the earth is flat. And yes, the Church still has an enormous influence on people, however much one may believe that people have a mind of their own. I never mentioned Africa or Asia anywhere in what I said, one needn't go any further than Ireland, or even think about how the Church, for years, has tried to cover up child abuse here in Europe and how scared people were to speak their mind.

I certainly am angry at religious institutions. I freely admit to that. I don't mind religion as such, the pontificating that these institutions do, however, is something I find at times hardly bareable. The 'we have the truth with us' and everyone else is wrong. Don't do this, because you'll go to hell. And that rule does not just apply to those who believe that truth, but also for guys like me, who don't. Fine by me if someone thinks euthanasia is wrong. But why should they determine how I am to lead my life? Did I ever vote for them? Did I ever even ask their opinion?

That is what I am pointing out. Nothing more, nothing less. The Church in these parts, the Islamic Ayatollahs elsewhere, none of them have been elected to tell us what to do. Still, and despite claims made in this thread, they have a massive influence on people's lives, both of their own faith and of another (or non-believers).

[AeolianHarp]

The apocathery monks provided medicine and hospitals for the poor until gold ol Henry viii shut them down.

[Peter]

Dear Peter,

Apologies accepted. In reply to a further post on this issue: of course, it is the case that institutions (religious and others) consist of people and thus are flawed. What I object to is their pretention that they hold all the wisdom and threaten the wrath of god over people (enough to scare quite a lot of them), if they do not agree with their position, or worse, actually don't wait for the wrath of god, but actually do it themselves.

I hold the Catholic Church at least co-responsible for the millions of deaths of AIDS-sufferers, of the death of many women who have had, have and will abort in back-streets and unsanitary conditions and so on. As I hold some Ayatollahs responsible for what has led to the killings of many innocents, or Jewish and Islamicextremists responsible for the impossibility to get out of the vicious circle of violence in the Middle East and indeed beyond there (we had a cretin killing people in Brussels probably in this context). All in the name of a god.

Do not forget that one can pick and choose from the holy scriptures: turn the other cheek or an eye for an eye?

I am indeed unforgiving for institutions that have been responsible for so much damage in the world and then their representatives still come on TV and tell us how to behave. As if they have a proven record of being right more than me. People have been gobbling this rubbish up for far too long.

Albert

Clearly you are very angry Albert, but I don't think your post is fair in that it completely ignores the good that the Catholic church does, from science, the arts to caring for the sick and poor.

"Statistics from the Vatican in 2012 indicate that Catholic Church-related organizations provide approximately a quarter of all HIV treatment, care, and support throughout the world and run more than 5000 hospitals, 18000 dispensaries and 9000 orphanages, many involved in AIDS-related activities."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catholi...nd_health_care

[RobertH]

The problem with this line of arguement is this. It assumes, indeed presumes that people in Africa or Asia or wherever are simply mindless automata in two respects. First it assumes they have no free choice in their own lives, a line of thought that the church has always said no matter how miserable somebodies circumstances are is just plain wrong.
Secondly, it assumes that the church has this unimaginable power over people so that what is says in each and every case always goes. This is just simply nonesense and takes no account of the complexities of human beings and their conditions and you realize that the churches power, such that it is, is only advisory and many people choose to ignore that advice.
The other point of course, is if we are talking about Africa, many of the countries their are riven by civil war, and how people can imagine when there is not even an effective government that the Vatican is somehow governing these people is bonkers!

[Albert Gans]

Dear Peter,

Apologies accepted. In reply to a further post on this issue: of course, it is the case that institutions (religious and others) consist of people and thus are flawed. What I object to is their pretention that they hold all the wisdom and threaten the wrath of god over people (enough to scare quite a lot of them), if they do not agree with their position, or worse, actually don't wait for the wrath of god, but actually do it themselves.

I hold the Catholic Church at least co-responsible for the millions of deaths of AIDS-sufferers, of the death of many women who have had, have and will abort in back-streets and unsanitary conditions and so on. As I hold some Ayatollahs responsible for what has led to the killings of many innocents, or Jewish and Islamicextremists responsible for the impossibility to get out of the vicious circle of violence in the Middle East and indeed beyond there (we had a cretin killing people in Brussels probably in this context). All in the name of a god.

Do not forget that one can pick and choose from the holy scriptures: turn the other cheek or an eye for an eye?

I am indeed unforgiving for institutions that have been responsible for so much damage in the world and then their representatives still come on TV and tell us how to behave. As if they have a proven record of being right more than me. People have been gobbling this rubbish up for far too long.

Albert

[Peter]

I read this thread with interest, and speaking as a catholic.
If I could put it like this, both sides of the road, the committed and the uncommitted, have valuable insights.
No instititution could have been around as long as the Church without picking up what might be called travel stains. Human beings still have human nature and being 'religious' (whatever that might mean) is certain to result in greater temptations and greater efforts needed to fight against the downward pull of what was always called 'the world, the flesh and the devil.'
The point I would like to stress from the cultural point of view - and this site is dedicated to one of the greatest of artists of all time , something we can all agree on I'm sure. On the cultural side, the Church would say that it is an ark for preserving the highest achievements of western culture, whether you happen to be a believer or not, it has preserved the deposit of not just faith but also the arts, culture, and so on.
If all sides could at least agree on its positive cultural role that would be a good thing.
It was always said in the classical world - and the Church took over this idea - that you have to think of a three fold hierachy. At the top is the supernatural - how do we relate to belief, or not as the case may be. Next in importance is the political - how do we govern ourselves, who takes the decisions. Finally, important but at the bottom the economic - how do we earn our bread. Modern society has inverted this pyramid - and put the economic above everything else - is it any wonder we're all messed?

Thank you Robert for that - I think the problem for a lot of people who are not religious is that when they look at religious institutions they expect perfection and then come down extra hard when they see that they are dealing with human beings with the same flaws that we all have. Thus the message is lost - 'Love one another'. Peace!

[AeolianHarp]

I read this thread with interest, and speaking as a catholic.
If I could put it like this, both sides of the road, the committed and the uncommitted, have valuable insights.
No instititution could have been around as long as the Church without picking up what might be called travel stains. Human beings still have human nature and being 'religious' (whatever that might mean) is certain to result in greater temptations and greater efforts needed to fight against the downward pull of what was always called 'the world, the flesh and the devil.'
The point I would like to stress from the cultural point of view - and this site is dedicated to one of the greatest of artists of all time , something we can all agree on I'm sure. On the cultural side, the Church would say that it is an ark for preserving the highest achievements of western culture, whether you happen to be a believer or not, it has preserved the deposit of not just faith but also the arts, culture, and so on.
If all sides could at least agree on its positive cultural role that would be a good thing.
It was always said in the classical world - and the Church took over this idea - that you have to think of a three fold hierachy. At the top is the supernatural - how do we relate to belief, or not as the case may be. Next in importance is the political - how do we govern ourselves, who takes the decisions. Finally, important but at the bottom the economic - how do we earn our bread. Modern society has inverted this pyramid - and put the economic above everything else - is it any wonder we're all messed?

Thoughtful post Robert.

[AeolianHarp]

I find it amazing that for centuries it was fine to torture and kill blasphemers, heathens, believers of other faiths.... and that even now that is something that happens in some countries. The few atheist countries that have gone anywhere near discriminating against religions are now considered rogue and intolerant (take North Korea, just as an example).

They have swung the pendulum the other way.

The intolerance of some faiths has had to be tolerated for centuries, while if one dares say a wrong word about god, it is still frowned upon by many people.

Indeed it is.I usually find evangelical Christians to be the worst offenders in this case. There are some that have microphones shouting hell fire in my city centre.

Frankly, I am sick and tired of having to apologise for not believing in some superior being guiding our lives. If people want to believe so, then that's fine by me. If, however, they decide that people with other views should be discriminated against, I get very stroppy.

Yes, I am not happy about that either. The Co op bank ended one fundie group's banking with them here in Britian a few years ago, as they were openly homophobic.

Very often, I make my views clear on this and I generally feel that it is mainly institutionalised religion that is what is really at heart of the problems with religions. It is not so much that believe in a higher being, but much more about the fact that religions are then turned into sources of (abuse of) power. A lot of those institutions or organisations linked to them have been the greatest criminal organisations around in history. I am deliberately not naming any particular one, you just take your pick. And what is worse even, to my mind, is that a lot of these institutions remain in position of both political and moral power in society, despite that history. Nazism is frowned upon (quite rightly) by most, but religious 'authorities' across the globe still are regarded in high esteem in many places, despite a long history of crimes against humanity at large.

I get very angry about that.

Yes, it is a problem.

[Peter]

Dear Peter,

As said, I have nothing against people believing in some superior being. What I loathe is that institutions such as the Catholic Church, which has been a party to many major crimes in history, from the inquisition over condoning rape and murder in the Middle Ages (Crusades and persecuting Jews), to the participation in slavery to more recently ignoring the ill-treatment of children, and which maintains a tradition of discrimination against women, still claim to hold the moral high ground. This does not just go for the Catholic Church, but also to Jewish religious leaders, who claim they can decree who is Jewish and who is not, or to some Ayatollahs, who make fatwahs over issues they have nothing more intelligent to say than you or me. The only difference is that they hold power.

The big difference with Stalinism and Nazism, as I mentioned, is that these institutions continue to be very powerful and even respected (by many, not me) in society. Stalinism and Nazism have been referred to the rubbish bin of history, which is where they belong. Mainframe society no longer takes them seriously. But if some archbishop/rabbi/imam raises a finger and uses arguments from holy scripts to make his (rarely her) case, than a lot of people, unfortunately, still listen.

This does not take away from what you say with regard to individuals within these institutions, who have indeed helped many people and have done good deeds.

One final point: don't call me names, don't get personal, I was not in the points I was making either. I am not narrow-minded, because I do not share your views. You are entitled to your opinions as much as I am and I do respect those. I just don't share them in this area, as opposed to our common views on Beethoven !

Kindest,

Albert

I also respect and understand your views though this isn't the right forum for us to be discussing such delicate matters, but I felt a response to the points raised was needed. With respect I don't think I was calling you names or getting personal, that was certainly not my intention and I apologise if that is how it seemed to you. My point about a wholesale condemnation of religion being too simplistic was general as I doubt that you would condemn teachers for example in the same way despite them having amongst the highest rates of child abuse that you specifically refer to.

[RobertH]

I read this thread with interest, and speaking as a catholic.
If I could put it like this, both sides of the road, the committed and the uncommitted, have valuable insights.
No instititution could have been around as long as the Church without picking up what might be called travel stains. Human beings still have human nature and being 'religious' (whatever that might mean) is certain to result in greater temptations and greater efforts needed to fight against the downward pull of what was always called 'the world, the flesh and the devil.'
The point I would like to stress from the cultural point of view - and this site is dedicated to one of the greatest of artists of all time , something we can all agree on I'm sure. On the cultural side, the Church would say that it is an ark for preserving the highest achievements of western culture, whether you happen to be a believer or not, it has preserved the deposit of not just faith but also the arts, culture, and so on.
If all sides could at least agree on its positive cultural role that would be a good thing.
It was always said in the classical world - and the Church took over this idea - that you have to think of a three fold hierachy. At the top is the supernatural - how do we relate to belief, or not as the case may be. Next in importance is the political - how do we govern ourselves, who takes the decisions. Finally, important but at the bottom the economic - how do we earn our bread. Modern society has inverted this pyramid - and put the economic above everything else - is it any wonder we're all messed?

[Albert Gans]

Dear Peter,

As said, I have nothing against people believing in some superior being. What I loathe is that institutions such as the Catholic Church, which has been a party to many major crimes in history, from the inquisition over condoning rape and murder in the Middle Ages (Crusades and persecuting Jews), to the participation in slavery to more recently ignoring the ill-treatment of children, and which maintains a tradition of discrimination against women, still claim to hold the moral high ground. This does not just go for the Catholic Church, but also to Jewish religious leaders, who claim they can decree who is Jewish and who is not, or to some Ayatollahs, who make fatwahs over issues they have nothing more intelligent to say than you or me. The only difference is that they hold power.

The big difference with Stalinism and Nazism, as I mentioned, is that these institutions continue to be very powerful and even respected (by many, not me) in society. Stalinism and Nazism have been referred to the rubbish bin of history, which is where they belong. Mainframe society no longer takes them seriously. But if some archbishop/rabbi/imam raises a finger and uses arguments from holy scripts to make his (rarely her) case, than a lot of people, unfortunately, still listen.

This does not take away from what you say with regard to individuals within these institutions, who have indeed helped many people and have done good deeds.

One final point: don't call me names, don't get personal, I was not in the points I was making either. I am not narrow-minded, because I do not share your views. You are entitled to your opinions as much as I am and I do respect those. I just don't share them in this area, as opposed to our common views on Beethoven !

Kindest,

Albert

[Peter]

I find it amazing that for centuries it was fine to torture and kill blasphemers, heathens, believers of other faiths.... and that even now that is something that happens in some countries. The few atheist countries that have gone anywhere near discriminating against religions are now considered rogue and intolerant (take North Korea, just as an example).

The intolerance of some faiths has had to be tolerated for centuries, while if one dares say a wrong word about god, it is still frowned upon by many people.

Frankly, I am sick and tired of having to apologise for not believing in some superior being guiding our lives. If people want to believe so, then that's fine by me. If, however, they decide that people with other views should be discriminated against, I get very stroppy.

Very often, I make my views clear on this and I generally feel that it is mainly institutionalised religion that is what is really at heart of the problems with religions. It is not so much that believe in a higher being, buyt much more about the fact that religions are then turned into sources of (abuse of) power. A lot of those institutions or organisations linked to them have been the greatest criminal organisations around in history. I am deliberately not naming any particular one, you just take your pick. And what is worse even, to my mind, is that a lot of these institutions remain in position of both political and moral power in society, despite that history. Nazism is frowned upon (quite rightly) by most, but religious 'authorities' across the globe still are regarded in high esteem in many places, despite a long history of crimes against humanity at large.

I get very angry about that.

Of course it's right to be angry at corruption, abuses of power and the injustices of the past. However these things occur in all institutions - atheist regimes such as Nazism and Communism have produced some of the world's greatest atrocities - in other words where ever human beings are involved there is corruption. When it comes to religion, it is easy to find fault and condemn all religion, like throwing the baby out with the bathwater - but this approach is too simplistic and ignores the core values of religions. Religious leaders have made attempts to apologise for the horrors and mistakes of the past - if only politicians would be as willing!

At the heart of the 10 commandments of the Jewish faith is 'Thou shalt not kill' and for Christians this was reinforced by Christ's commandment to love one another which is extended into compassion for the sick and the poor. That people have ignored this and perverted the teachings is the fault of weak human beings, many as you point out who are or have been in religious organisations. Much good work is done by very brave people, often in dangerous situations in order to live lives faithfully helping people through their own sacrifices. If everyone lived their lives according to the true values at the heart of most religions, love, kindness and compassion, the world would be a better place. As it is we live in very secular times but we see a widening of the gap between rich and poor, an increase in violence and selfishness, and a society that places very little value on human life but worships materialism.