Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Thecard]

I don't see why a Christian being upset about a son of man and woman claiming to hold the keys to Paradise would surprise you.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Given your previous statements concerning religion, I thought you probably were Catholic.

To my knowledge, the Pope does not claim to decide who gets into heaven.

[Thecard]

Two words, Hunt:
Excommunication
Interdiction

[fqllve]

Two words:
Papal Bull

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Popes are awesome.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

Two words, Hunt:
Excommunication
Interdiction

Many forms of Christianity practice some manner of excommunication. Even so, Catholic excommunication does not explicitly bar one from entering heaven, it bars one from the rituals of the Roman Catholic Church.

I certainly do not think the Pope would say excommunicating someone can supersede the will of god as to their final fate.

[Dorten]

Official Excommunication is not an actual act of detaching someone from Church body. It's just an official acknowledgment of the detachment that has already happened due to the person in question committing something against their beliefs.
So, even if excommunication has not been cancelled, the person can still return to the Church body by repenting his sins.

[Thecard]

Two words, Hunt:
Excommunication
Interdiction

Many forms of Christianity practice some manner of excommunication. Even so, Catholic excommunication does not explicitly bar one from entering heaven, it bars one from the rituals of the Roman Catholic Church.
I certainly do not think the Pope would say excommunicating someone can supersede the will of god as to their final fate.

The rituals, like the last rites, are necessary to get into heaven.  Also, they aren't seen as Christian any more, so in the pope's eyes he's just damned them.

I highly doubt the pope would say he was superseding God.  He is still presuming he can.  Denial can't change a statement from true to false or back again.  It just don't work that way.  There's some story they have about Jesus giving Peter the authority to rule Christendom or something.  And no, it isn't in the Bible.

And yeah, I'm not Anabaptist either.  I mean, if the Amish want to say someone isn't welcome into their clubhouse, I have no real problem with that, though it is a little bit of a dick move sometimes.

But the pope (or any other denominational leader) saying he can choose who is Christian, and who isn't, is a false prophet.
The pope used to (still does, if I remember right) use excommunication and interdiction to influence secular leaders.  Some king or other got frostbite waiting outside a chapel for the pope to let him back into the club.  He's recognized as being able to let you back in, or shut you out.  You remember that whole thing Jesus was talking about, how the "son of man" was given authority to forgive sins?  Yeah, only Jesus can do that.  I really don't like the pope saying he can, because he can't.

Even to look at it from the perspectives you offer, it seems amoral and un-Christian to me.  God, and God alone, can judge.  Man really 'oughta just shut the fuck up.  I mean, I think popery is a sin, but I don't think committing a sin is what damns your soul so much as your intent.  I would not, could not, say the pope or any of his followers will go to hell.

I am perfectly entitled to say he is wrong and not being a true Christian, though.  Mostly because in saying that, I don't think I could damn him.
It's like, I am never going to tell my Islamic friend he is going to hell for not believing in Jesus.  He may, but he may not.  I don't know what the fuck is going through God's mind, and I really don't have to.  It's his job, not mine, and not the pope's.
I think Catholicism and some forms of Protestantism shouldn't (and can't) be generalized as the same thing.



Also, I kinda find it funny that you mistook me for a Catholic.    What made you think that?


(Okay, technically I'm catholic, but not Catholic.   There's sort of a difference, before some wise-ass joins the thread to point that out.  Little "c" is just another word we can use for Christian fellowship, big "C" is the pope's church.)


Ninja'd?  Ah well.



Oh, uh, important thing about Catholics.  They believe in an impersonal God, where you have to go through a priest to get forgiveness.  That is, to me, the same as popery.  I believe the entire point of Christianity is a personal link to God.  Anything less of that is less of Christianity.

Guess I probably should've started with that, huh?  Would've made this... I dunno, about five sentences long?

[Strife26]

Would I be correct to place you as a Southern Lutheran?

[Dorten]

The rituals, like the last rites, are necessary to get into heaven.  Also, they aren't seen as Christian any more, so in the pope's eyes he's just damned them.

Not the rituals, but sacraments, which in extraordinary circumstances can be committed without rituals and/or even by God Himself. For example in Orthodox Tradition it is believed, that not christened soldiers, who die defending their Homeland are baptized with their blood. Same goes for early martyrs and so on.

[MetalSlimeHunt]

The rituals, like the last rites, are necessary to get into heaven.  Also, they aren't seen as Christian any more, so in the pope's eyes he's just damned them.

Once upon a time, but not these days. The current official position of the Roman Catholic Church is very ecumenical and states that anyone who does not freely reject god is not condemned. This, of course, still screws over atheists like myself (not that I really care), but would apply to most anyone whom you would call Christan.

But the pope (or any other denominational leader) saying he can choose who is Christian, and who isn't, is a false prophet.
The pope used to (still does, if I remember right) use excommunication and interdiction to influence secular leaders.

Not as much as you'd think. It happens, rarely, and no one whom it happens to these days seems to care very much.

Some king or other got frostbite waiting outside a chapel for the pope to let him back into the club.  He's recognized as being able to let you back in, or shut you out.

You're missing a vital part of that story. Here's the thing: If you come to the Pope and honestly ask for reconciliation after being excommunicated? He has to say yes. In the particular story the Pope was stalling inside the chapel because he didn't really want to reconcile the excommunicated king, but he ultimately had no choice in the matter.

You remember that whole thing Jesus was talking about, how the "son of man" was given authority to forgive sins?  Yeah, only Jesus can do that.  I really don't like the pope saying he can, because he can't.

Excommunication isn't even really about sins. It's being excluded from the church community. You can be sinless and end up excommunicated.

Also, I kinda find it funny that you mistook me for a Catholic.    What made you think that?

The way you asserted AI is impossible reminded me of Catholic dogmatism on certain subjects.

[Thecard]

Not really, no.  I'm a baptist, I guess.  I'm not really a "southern baptist" though, despite my location.  I kinda don't associate myself too closely as a baptist though.  If the members of my church say something that goes against my belief (none have, that being why I say I'm baptist) I'd get the hell out of there.  I like my pastor, and agree with him most every Sunday, but ultimately the only authority I recognize is God's, and so I form my own beliefs apart from the church.  I've actually discussed this with my pastor, and he agrees with me on open interpretation for the most part.

Spoiler: My mom though... (click to show/hide)

She's the main reason I hesitate when someone asks me what denomination I am.  She is a lot more conservative than I am.  We butt heads often, and she thinks that all baptists should think the same.  She had a fit when I wore my work clothes (named such from mission work) to church.
She does not hesitate to tell me I am her son, and should "obey her without question like the Bible says."  She went to Biola, and took a theology class.  She does not like it at all when I don't agree with her views.  My brother and sister have stopped going to church (at the first chance they got) but I enjoy going and my parents have actually had to drop me off because one was sick or they were going to be on a trip.  Still, my mother gets is upset with me wearing paint-stained jeans to church than she was with my siblings for not going to church.  She is ruled very much by tradition, most of which was set by her mother (a woman who refuses to listen to Obama because he's black).

My father backs her up every time, but between just the two of us we rarely argue about anything.  We have really similar views, he is just slightly more republican than I am.

My mom wishes I was just like her.  Hell, I would be if she had tried to tell me anything.  But most everything I know, I had to learn myself.  Through books, internet, and experience.  I didn't know about Muslims until I actually met a Muslim in seventh grade.  My mom was afraid to tell me there were people out there who weren't Christian.

You can see how well that worked out for my brother and sister.  Apparently, at least two out of three times it causes a sort of religious apathy.  I have no idea how I turned out any different.  Looking back, I have no idea how the pressure outside my burst bubble didn't just kill me.  Damn near did, I guess.  My brother came even closer.  My sister... my sister is extremely complicated.  But we all developed coping mechanisms. 
I had reading, my brother had mechanics, and my sister had her imagination.  Reading... reading made me anti-social.  Also made me pretty fucking arrogant.  My brother didn't talk to anyone else either.  He just worked with broken shit, trying to make it work again.  Got real good at it too.  My sister did the opposite.  She can't help but try to make friends with people, but it invariably ends in failure.

And sometimes I really don't know what to do.  My mom believes those who are younger are foolish and should listen to their wise elders. 

I don't believe one of my teachers is doing her job correctly.  My mom told me I could tell the principal that, but that I should not tell my teacher, or she'll get mad.  She said "discretion is the better part of wisdom."
I told her the expression she was looking for was actually "discretion is the better part of valour."  She nodded, and looked happy that I was agreeing with her.  I followed that up with "and it's justifying cowardice."  Her smile dropped.  I told her I would rather be a righteous fool than a wise coward.  That not telling my teacher I believed she is not really teaching as she ought would just be opening the door to being a doormat to my boss in the future.
That did not make her any happier.  She worked in a department store for a year or two and while she never did anything that was technically illegal, she did give discounts to customers to give them better service.  I find that morally wrong, but what does a young fool know?

This happens in matters of religion too.  Oddly, it is most obvious in the jeans.  My parents told me I should do as they say and dress special for one day of the week because they told me to.  Finally, they backed off, but it took several months of uneasiness.  And she still does not understand why I dress the way I do.  I made it clear that it was how I feel closest to God, and that worship is every day.  Sunday is just communion and fellowship.  The church is not really God's house, if you think about it.  He owns the whole damn universe, he lives in it all, and he lives in me.  I'm no closer or further than him when I go to church, I'm just closer to other Christians.

Good Lord, did I just rant about my family at one o' clock in the morning in a thread about atheism/religion?
Guess I did.  Well, it didn't waste your time if you didn't read it. 



Ninja'd.  Not really surprised.

You're missing a vital part of that story. Here's the thing: If you come to the Pope and honestly ask for reconciliation after being excommunicated? He has to say yes. In the particular story the Pope was stalling inside the chapel because he didn't really want to reconcile the excommunicated king, but he ultimately had no choice in the matter.

I think you may be missing a vital part of what I am saying.
The fact the pope has to say yes.  That part.  That part is not right.  Because the pope has no authority.  That's like me saying "Okay Hunt, you can be atheist if you want."  Saying that implies I have control over your belief.  But I don't.  Which is why I'm never going to legitimately say that to someone. 

I cannot tell you that you are welcome into heaven because I forgive you.  Neither can the pope, though he presumes he can. 

That is why I don't like the pope.  Because he thinks what he says and thinks actually has an effect on anyone's final destination but his own.

[Wolfy]

Hopw do you know what the pope "thinks"?

[Criptfeind]

Are you calling the Pope a liar then? Because we sure know what he says.

[Grek]

Disclaimer: I am not catholic and not even religious. That said, Thecard is basically wrong on all levels.

Theologically speaking, the Pope does not have the ability to allow or disallow entry into heaven, nor to change divine policy, nor to do... pretty much any of the things Thecard is mad about him doing. The Pope is the person who, in the opinion of the College of Cardinals, is the world's foremost expert on God. According to Catholics, the Pope isn't God and is not allowed to make new dogma. He can only settle disputes about dogma, issue clarifications and weigh in where expert opinion is required.

Interdiction is the Pope (or some other church official) announcing that, in their official opinion, the person or persons being interdicted should not be given sacraments. Usually, this is done because the person is, again, in their official opinion, refusing to admit to or does not seek to be forgiven for one or more sins. This means three things:
A] Because confessing to and seeking forgiveness for sin is a requirement to get into Heaven, the interdicted party does not meet the requirements to be admitted into Heaven upon death.
B] Because confessing to and seeking forgiveness for sin is also a requirement to receive Catholic sacraments from Catholic priests, the interdicted party is not allowed to receive sacraments.
C] Because the entire point of declaring an interdiction is to prevent people who refuse to accept and repent for their sins from receiving sacraments, going to the Pope and telling him that you accept and are sorry for your sins requires him to either A] say that you are lying about being sorry, or B] remove the interdiction, because the original reason for it existing is gone.

Excommunication is the same thing, but also means that you're forbidden from preaching, reading liturgies to the congregation and from serving as a church official.

[Helgoland]

Oh, uh, important thing about Catholics.  They believe in an impersonal God, where you have to go through a priest to get forgiveness.  That is, to me, the same as popery.  I believe the entire point of Christianity is a personal link to God.  Anything less of that is less of Christianity.

I'm a Catholic agnostic, and actually a bit offended by that - you misrepresent the Catholic church, you misrepesent the institution of the pope, and you misrepresent the point of christianity.

Last things first: Take a look at this SMBC. The point of christianity is not the idea of a personal god; the idea is that the laws that are put down are less important than not being a dick. Judaism you might call a lawyer's (no insult intended) religion: You have a set of rules to which you stick, and you're golden. Christianity - and Catholicism especially so! - is about the intent behind the laws. (Of course modern judaism contains these ideas as well, just like the Catholic church is pretty protestant nowadays, but you get my point.) For the same reason I believe protestantism is a step back on the evolutionary ladder: Historically, reformation was necessary, but it spawned a lot of fundamentalist tendencies and made man once again powerless. Sola fide is in itself a worrying concept, and it's only made worse by the 'holier-than-thou' effects.

Catholics also believe in a personal god; if you deny that, I'll start calling all christians polytheists. I have to admit I don't quite remember the theological reasoning behind having to go to confession, but it fits in with the general emphasis on organizing, collectivizing religion instead of everyone talking to good 'in private' and eventually having a myriad little denominations. It's not the priest, or the bishop, or the pope who forgives your sins, it is god; confession is just the way there. You still pray, you still pray in private as well, but all the sacraments bind you to the church collective.

As for the pope: The papacy is the ultimate expression of the will to unity, of the emphasis on the communal and collective aspects of religion. Doesn't it strike you as wierd that so many claim to follow the bible but to completely different things? Having one large organization keeps small parts from straying too far away; regional differences are widespread and very much allowed, but Rome keeps the regional communities from going completely bonkers. WBBC is something that would be commpletely unthinkable; to see an example of this principle not having worked google Society of St. Pius X.

TL;DR: Christianity is not about a private link to god, but about adhering to the spirit of the law instead of to the law itself. The individualization of religion is bad, and papacy is the ultimate expression of keeping religion organized and communal.
Also, what Grek said.

I'll admit one thing, though: The Papal infallibility dogma is a shame and has to go - rather sooner than later. It doesn't make much sense anyway.
Also, I'd like to invite Thecard to a Catholic mass sometime, just because