AMA about Roman Catholicism

3pict3tus · 2012-05-23T13:26:40.961743+00:00

Why are you Roman Catholic and not Eastern Orthodox?

It comes down to the four marks of the Church found in the Nicene Creed that we both believe in. And the filioque clause is right.

The four marks of the Church are "One, holy, catholic and apostolic"

Both Churches can qualify quite nicely for the one, holy and apostolic (although Catholicism can boast far greater apostolicity).

The "catholic" bit means "universal". The name Eastern Orthodox is a dead giveaway--- it isn't universal. It is a regional Church with regional membership. Catholicism, on the other hand, is everywhere.

So, based on the criteria that both Churches believe in, the Catholic Church wins.

That's the short answer at least

Who is your favourite Catholic thinker?

Aquinas without a shadow of a doubt.

3pict3tus · 2012-05-23T13:18:31.387694+00:00

The actions of people do not in any way affect the truth value of what they believe. It would be absurd to try and argue for Catholicism by pointing out to its exemplary individuals, and reciprocally one cannot argue against Catholicism through its historical shortcomings.

Plue none of those.... distasteful individuals (*cough Alexander VI) affected dogma in any way.

3pict3tus · 2012-05-23T03:14:16.065072+00:00

Yeah. So let's take the example of Pope Pius XII infallibly defining the Assumption of Mary as Dogma in 1950. He issued the Apostolic Constitution (the highest form of Papal decree) upon a near-unanimous agreement from the bishops Munifecentissimus Deus defining the Assumption of Mary as dogma.

3pict3tus · 2012-05-23T03:02:13.296723+00:00

It's a very misunderstood doctrine. People tend to confuse infallibility with impeccability.

It's easier to begin with what Papal infallibility is not, because there are some pretty bad misconceptions about it.

It does not mean the Pope is flawless
It does not mean that everything the Pope says is right
It does not mean that the Pope can just say whatever he wants and make it infallible dogma

Papal infallibility allows the Pope to proclaim dogma ex cathedra upon ratification by the College of Cardinals. So it is not an arbitrary one-man decision. So the Pope can very well say whatever he likes, he can write books and letters and make speeches and they are not infallible.

The theological way Papal infallibility works is that Catholics believe that God tends to His Church (makes sense no?) and that the Vicar of Christ can, by the Grace of God and the Power of the Holy Spirit, proclaim statements on dogma for the increase of knowledge of the Church.

ForeverSolus · 2012-05-22T23:33:06.085543+00:00

We have told you many times why the universe exists

Not in that comment you didn't.

ForeverSolus · 2012-05-22T22:11:11.864167+00:00

I've actually been wondering this for a while. I hope an atheist can finally step up and tell me why the universe exists, so far it hasn't been adressed.

demitigation · 2 days

2.

None of those quotes tell me biblical literacy. They just tell me that there exists some text that can be considered inspired. What is this text? How inspired is it?

The NIV isn't Catholic, it's Greek. Come on, do a little googling.

Huh? I wasn't talking about the NIV, I was talking about the Canon of the Holy Bible, not some translation.

Answer my question. Who made your Bible? Why do you trust them? Why don't you include other books in your Bible?

You seem to have overlooked this question because it is a huge problem for Protestants and Biblical Literalists. Go back far enough and you find that your "Bible" is nothing more than what a Catholic Council said it was, meaning you must accept the authority of the Church. Unless you yourself sifted through the Greek, Hebrew, and Aramaic manuscripts, and, inspired by the Holy Spirit managed to procure yourself a Bible.

TheresJustNoWay · 2 days

“A man has free will to the extent that he is rational.” ~ Thomas Aquinas

“Rightly defined philosophy is simply the love of wisdom.” ~ Cicero

“Knowledge is the food of the soul.” ~ Plato

“An absolutely new idea is one of the rarest things known to man.” ~ Thomas More

“There is nothing higher than reason.” ~ Kant

“Much learning does not teach understanding.” ~ Heraclitus

“Only the educated are free.” ~ Epictetus

“You are a little soul carrying around a corpse.” ~ Epictetus

“We have two ears and one mouth so that we can listen twice as much as we speak.” ~ Epictetus

“Dogs and philosophers do the greatest good and get the fewest rewards.” ~ Diogenes of Sinope

demitigation · 2 days

Do you believe in the Trinity?
Where is Biblical literacy or sola scriptura found in the Bible?
As a Catholic this one interests me: How can you trust the authority of Bishops of the Catholic Church to have essentially chosen your Bible for you? How do you know you have the right Bible? You are reading the Catholic one made from extra-biblical judgement. What if they snuck in the Book of Enoch or the Gospel of Thomas etc etc?

cielol · 3 days

I dislike the fact that many over-eager atheists on the internet seem to view logic, reason, and scientific thought as something you gain magically by becoming atheist.

Or that atheists have a monopoly on all those things. That bugs me particularly. I've met so many atheists of the dumber variety that are shocked that I can "believe in science" (whatever that means).

3pict3tus · 3 days

^ smart

3pict3tus · 3 days

I understand what you're getting at, but I think flair is sort of important so we understand where each person is coming from. I think without flair every other comment will have a "what are your beliefs?" in it.

Plus it will encourage more discussion, people can spontaneously ask "Oh, you're a Catholic? What's your thought on this....". I've done this many times on r/DebateReligion (before the advent of this subreddit) and flair has been instrumental for this purpose.

ShadowStarshine · 4 days

Is it fair to say they are unjustified in belief then?

Yes of course they are unjustified. I already said they were.

They would still be right, but their true belief is unjustified.

I don't know about your knowledge of philosophy, but I subscribe to the opinion that knowledge is justified true belief as explained by Robert Nozick.

So the theist would be right, but would not have justification for it. Their belief is as justified as a lucky guess, i.e. not at all.

ShadowStarshine · 4 days

When I go to a doctor, I'm skeptical about his abilities. I have had good doctors and bad doctors. I do not start with a trust in my doctor. When I go to a doctor multiple times and they treat me multiple times, I gain trust. This trust is built on experience.

Actually yeah, the doctor analogy doesn't really add up. A better one would have been observed science or history. You believe what you are told to believe. You don't actually go digging in Roman ruins and manuscripts, you just listen to scholarly consensus. You don't know the world is flat, you just accept what you have been told. These are probably better examples than the doctor one.

I'm not asking you to defend theists who use terrible arguments, but ones that don't have any.

Why do I have to defend them? I respect the rational atheist over the irrational theist any day. That's like asking me to defend the Westboro Baptist Church, or asking you to defend Stalin.

I don't pretend to defend those people, only justify why it is they believe, not that it is a good way to do it.

ShadowStarshine · 4 days

No, but their belief is still valid. The basis for most of them is the trust they have in others to do that thinking for them. So on a local level you trust your priest and assume he has reasons for believing therefore validating your own indirectly. Then you have illustrious minds like Aquinas who they say "Well he's on my side, seems legit" sort of attitude. One big argument from authority.

This seems to be problematic but that's the way it is with most things. I support Israel in the Israel-Palestine conflict not because of my excellent reasons, but because of the reasons of others. I'm no doctor and I trust my doctor's decisions without looking into them (too much at least), just like everybody else.

I also don't think this is an issue that is exclusive to theists. I know too many atheists whose reasons for unbelief are: "I didn't like going to Church and Hitchens is a good speaker".

no_front_teeth · 4 days

Risk-taker

ShadowStarshine · 5 days

I tell them as politely as I can to avoid debating so as to save themselves the embarrassment and provide r/atheism with more fodder. Then I try and introduce them to some basic apologetics so, when they need to, they can defend themselves without looking like idiots spewing the "It's faith so I don't need no proof" jargon.

develdevil · 5 days

I can easily define a "right" as whatever I believe anybody should be able to do or enjoy without any constraints. If I think there are ways the world could evolve in order for me to enjoy it better

Yes, by all means. But know that enforcing your own moral preference is as baseless as forcing others to prefer chocolate ice cream. It's a taste, a fashion, an opinion. Always remember that and your morality will be peppered with grains of salt.

Of course, the smarter moral nihilists will pretend their moral system is "objective" and will try to convince other people that nihilism is wrong and that they must change their views to the true way

That is sneaky. I like it.

develdevil · 5 days

Or I'm a terrible nihlist. ;)

I'd say a very good one actually. :D

develdevil · 5 days

I would disagree with that, because I think that my caring is strictly biological and is derived from empathy

Well yes, that would be the case in an atheistic world. But then morality is like any other natural desire like your sex drive, and can be spurned with no real moral repercussions. It makes morality a thing of brain signals and chemicals, which to me is slightly problematic.

And your also wrong in saying that all men have a moral compass. This is easily explained through psychopaths, people who lack human empathy. It is a mental disorder and they are born that way.

My bad, should have specified. I meant all healthy and wholesome men.

develdevil · 5 days

Well I would agree. As a theist and a Catholic I believe all men have an intrinsic moral compass and are aware of a Natural Law. So I think atheists like you who have this indelible mark of morality and love is part of our human nature built in the image of God. Well so runs the Christian explanation for that "feeling" you speak of that we all share.

3pict3tus

TROPHY CASE

you'll need to login or register to do that

create a new account

login