I, personally, would not call everything about Catholicism sensible, but I'm not going to go into scripture. I'm just pointing to how they let themselves get led by the nose by an obviously corrupt Vatican.
Certainly not everything! Not even most things endorsed by the Church! But the Catholics themselves are generally pretty chill about religion.
Yeah, when you're only considering the liberal, suburban, cafeterian ones. Now, when you go to Liberation Theologists, OCC, Opus Dei, and groups that practice mortification of the flesh...
Pretty sure they're not the majority though. Well, certainly not the majority in Europe. Additionally, Wikipedia tells me that many of the criticisms against Opus Dei are invented. Sure, there're some crazy people among them, and the entire thing is quite controversial in the Vatican, but there're worse people. I mean, they only tend to hurt themselves.
Anyway, Opus Dei is about 100 000 people, OCC doesn't look to crazy (or I got the wrong link. It's some sort of Christian College, right?) , Liberation Theology seems actually positive on first glance and mortification of the flesh is rather limited. Also:
Catholic moral theologians recommend that the scrupulous not practice mortification, avoid persons and materials of an ascetical nature, and receive frequent spiritual direction and psychological help.
One of the most radical aspects of liberation theology was the social organization, or re-organization, of church practice through the model of Christian base communities (CBCs). Liberation theology strove to be a bottom-up movement in practice, with Biblical interpretation and liturgical practice designed by lay practitioners themselves, rather than by the orthodox Church hierarchy. In this context, sacred text interpretation is understood as "praxis". Liberation theology seeks to interpret the actions of the Catholic Church and the teachings of Jesus Christ from the perspective of the poor and disadvantaged. In Latin America, liberation theologians specifically target the severe disparities between rich and poor in the existing social and economic orders within the nations' political and corporate structures. It is a strong critique of the various economic and social structures, such as an oppressive government, dependence upon First World countries and the traditional hierarchical Church, that allow some to be extremely rich while others are unable to even have safe drinking water.
Really, doesn't seem to be that bad right. Criticize the wealthy, take from them and give to the poor. Really, it's just Socialism/Marxism with a biblical context.
I think it's an argument in support of science that we got it wrong and then, with further study, learned more and got it right. People make mistakes; the process ends up working eventually. We're learning more all the time and there's an incentive to overturn bad research. Unlike shamans passing down myths unquestioningly.
With the difference that myths and shamans never tried to explain scientific phenomena, you're mostly right. It's a common misconception that myths and other tales are some sort of primitive form of science. They really aren't.
Studying the situation in which these are told, their main purpose is to reinforce coming of age ceremonies and all that stuff.
Author
Topic: Things that made you go "WTF?" today o_O (Read 14929206 times)