I think if a person is very opposed to something, and if you believe that something is completely false, it's hard to respect people who choose that thing. Or rather, you might respect the person, but you can't respect the choice.
Whenever I discuss something, I try to argue with facts, not insults, and I try to hear the other side, and find some merit in it, and I try not to talk about things if I know nothing about them. As I see it, this is doing precisely what you advocate - being willing to see the other side and staying open-minded to some extent.
But open-mindedness must have its limits. If someone insists that 2 plus 2 equals 5, I can't nod respectfully and try to see it from their point of view.
Similarly, in my opinion, if someone insists there is a god, and the pope has special access to him, and priests possibly too, and the church as a whole is capable of infallibility, and abortion is a sin, and Copernicus was evil to say the earth moved round the sun, and god sent his son down and this son was born of a virgin. . . Yes, of course you're right to say that things change, things progress, and some of this might change too (some has already changed), but nevertheless, there comes a point when you just have to wonder. . . for me, it becomes like 2 plus 2 equals 5, and all I can do is shrug and wonder "why would anyone believe that?" If you then add the evil that the Catholic church has committed over the last few decades (not to mention, centuries), then it really is very hard to find the merit in it. My mother was a catholic, as were both her parents, so I know that individual catholics can be good people, as can individual protestants, Jews, Moslems, humanists, whatever. But the institution is something else.
You expect me to respect your Catholicism and your criticism, but you won't respect my atheism or my criticism.
And I don't know what you mean when you say the pope has only spoken ex cathedra once in the history of the church. I couldn't tell whether you meant this pope or other popes. Anyway, the point is that the CHURCH, through its agents, considers itself capable of infallibility, and they define this as excluding even the possibility of error, which is nuts, unless you're talking about 2 plus 2 equals 4, which is the kind of thing where error isn't possible i.e. matters of definition. In all other matters, error is ALWAYS possible.
Sarah
At 2:49 PM -0500 02/03/2003, dsk wrote:
. . .the decent thing is to respect other people's paths, even if you don't understand them.To use the simpler example you gave, if I met someone who loved Celine Dion, I'd be curious about why that is. I'd probably not ever love her music as that person does, but after the conversation would have a fuller understanding than I do now, not only of Celine Dion, but also of that person and, if I'm willing to do some self-reflection, of myself, too. From what you've written, I imagine you'd treat that person with disdain and miss that connection and all of that learning. Your loss. As far as your description of the Catholic Church goes, it's an incomplete understanding, and some of the items in your list are not even correct. There is now communal confession, for example, and people are urged to pray wherever, whenever, and to cultivate their relationship with God in many different ways, very few of which include a priest. On the issue of infallibility: In the history of the Church the Pope has spoken "ex cathedra" only once and that was on a matter of dogma concerning Mary that most Catholics believed already anyway, so he is not "infallible" except under extremely unusual circumstances. Such circumstances have existed ONCE. I could take each of the items you've mentioned and show the discrepancy between the publicized "official line" you've read and the experience of the people in the pews, which will eventually lead to change. Since you give the impression that your mind is made up, I won't go into any of that, except to say that there are many things about the Church that I (and many Catholics) disagree with and some teachings I completely ignore (bet you didn't think a Catholic could do that!). I pay most attention to the one Church rule that overrides all others: that I follow my conscience. That rule has been part of the Church since its beginnings and the one that consistently makes the most sense to me. It's of no consequence to me whether you find any value in the Church or any organized religion. I find it interesting and rather humorous to see that it's not only people of faith who can become rigid and dogmatic in their beliefs. I'm reminded of the value of humility and how important it is for one's own humanity to always remember that no one person (or path) has all the answers.
