Should Catholic voters support Democrats?

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(08-25-2020, 07:04 PM)SunsetBengal Wrote: I was raised Catholic, and attended Catholic school for elementary.  I personally wasn't a victim of a predatory Priest;  However, I found out many years later, that a cousin of my same age was abused as an Altar Boy.  Like many of my generation, I wandered from the church as a young man.  I tried going back in my late 20s through early 30s, but the more revelations of evidence of abuse and cover ups by the church that came to light, I just finally decided that the hypocrisy was too much for me.

The wisdom, spirituality and meaning behind all of the teachings of Catholicism, are why I'll never leave and my faith is as strong as ever; I really couldn't care less about what priests do behind closed doors. Indeed, it is beyond an atrocity for the children and I feel awful at even the thought of what goes on, but the priests are the ones that have to deal with the consequences and the afterlife; my relationship with God, the bible and the teachings therein, don't change because priests are pedophiles.

I eschew most of the non-universal, "rules and laws," (The 10 commandments, for example, are fairly universal) that exist in the bible, as (as I mentioned) they were a method of control used in medieval times, to ensure population control, reduced crime rates, etc.: I get the symbolism from everything, but it doesn't mean that you're a sinner if you think a chick is sexy, who isn't your wife.

Reading proverbs still puts me at great ease, as the wisdom and teachings in that book (a fair amount is common-sense) are just great to absorb and digest. Revelations is a great read and the symbolism contained therein is superb as well. Jesus, the prophets, David, the amount of life lessons and wisdom contained in their respective stories, is great stuff and Samson is a great story of redemption and faith.

The Old Testament rocks.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-25-2020, 05:20 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Yeah; those were all forms of, "control," to keep the population low and dumb, while the governing body of Europe (essentially the Western World for 1700+ years) could maintain their position atop the rest of the world (the Romans).

Reading things contextually and living with the knowledge and information that we have in the modern world, we know it to be true that the Earth is hundreds of millions of years old (disproving Adam and Eve). We know it be NOT true that Abraham lived to 300 years old or whatever (as no human can live more than the centenarian mark in the modern world). We know it to be true that Revelations did not happen (it was a depiction of the writer's vision of Judgement Day). Etc., etc.

Many people don't realise (especially the, "Christians," of the US) that these were just men who wrote about their experiences/visions/their version of events/etc. and that what is written, is not 100% true or could even be proven to be true; why are their accounts so cherished and held in such high regard, while others' depictions are not? Otherwise, I could write a 2000 page book tomorrow and talk about a new messiah, that trounced aliens and destroyed them by sending nuclear bombs back to their homeworld and reclaim the Earth, thus starting a new world as we know it today!

Oh, I see, L. Ron Hubbard already did that...

Not sure why you quoted me without addressing anything I said. The Catholic Church doesn’t state that the universe is 6000 years.

If you don’t like what the Catholic Church believes then why are you a “devout” Catholic. There are over two hundred dogma that you are required
to accept. I think many are absurd, so I don’t consider myself a Catholic anymore. You argue they are absurd yet refer to yourself as devout.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(08-25-2020, 08:26 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Not sure why you quoted me without addressing anything I said. The Catholic Church doesn’t state that the universe is 6000 years.

If you don’t like what the Catholic Church believes then why are you a “devout” Catholic. There are over two hundred dogma that you are required
to accept. I think many are absurd, so I don’t consider myself a Catholic anymore. You argue they are absurd yet refer to yourself as devout.

Yeah, maybe in 500 AD.

And I did; you mentioned, "dogma," then I responded that said, "dogma," was just control and stuff that is to be taken as fluff in today's modern world.

- I go to church every Sunday, without fail (haven't since February, due to COVID). This, I deem to be the most-important part of any religion, aside from living your life with the morals and values it teaches.
- On that note, I absolutely live on the morals and values that Catholicism teaches and there have been occasions in life where I have not (nobody's perfect and I have acted out of turn on a few occasions, but I have atoned or attempted to atone for the times I have not been a model person). This, I also feel, is what separates each religion and sect from the other (its morals and values)
- I pray a ton
- I wear 2 crosses and (a currently missing) St. Antonio around my neck, along with a rosary ring and an Our Father ring.
- I observe Lenten tradition and do not eat meat on Fridays (an Italian-Catholic thing), haven't my entire life (there have been fluke occurrences).
- I have St. Antonio tattooed as a half-sleeve

Religion, like everything in life, requires an evolution of sorts and a shit-ton of so-called, "dogma," that you talk about, has to be eschewed or completely gone against; every religion is chock full of hypocrisies and paradoxes, thus on occasion, it's impossible to act, speak or think one way that is acceptable, while at the same time not going against another teaching.

For example, Jesus was a walking Golden Rule observer, yet if we are to follow his lead and treat everyone how he/we wished to be treated, why am I not allowed to bring a raised and Catholic-following friend to church with me, because he's gay? I have to turn him away and shun him, because his lifestyle is viewed as sin in the eyes of the faith I believe in?

And there are a lot more paradoxes where that came from.

Therefore, all of this, "dogma," which attempts to create black and white scenarios, cannot be adhered to in an increasingly grey world. Period. Accept it. You even said so yourself:

Quote: I mentioned earlier that priests can now remove excommuincation due to abortion.

And there's your evolution! One piece of, "dogma," that has been eschewed.

But then you mention:

Quote:doctrine is infallible.

(which it isn't)

So what is it? Is the doctrine sound? Or is it that not everything has to be followed to the letter in 2020, due to a significantly more-complicated world than it was 1800 years ago?

Anyways, this is a discussion for another thread and I'm rambling to death anyways. Basically, I know from what I see, experience, think and do daily, that I'm a helluvalot of a better Catholic (in terms of adhering to the doctrine) than 95% of the ones I've spent my entire life around and that is completely non-hyperbolic.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-25-2020, 09:01 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: Yeah, maybe in 500 AD.

And I did; you mentioned, "dogma," then I responded that said, "dogma," was just control and stuff that is to be taken as fluff in today's modern world.

- I go to church every Sunday, without fail (haven't since February, due to COVID). This, I deem to be the most-important part of any religion, aside from living your life with the morals and values it teaches.
- On that note, I absolutely live on the morals and values that Catholicism teaches and there have been occasions in life where I have not (nobody's perfect and I have acted out of turn on a few occasions, but I have atoned or attempted to atone for the times I have not been a model person). This, I also feel, is what separates each religion and sect from the other (its morals and values)
- I pray a ton
- I wear 2 crosses and (a currently missing) St. Antonio around my neck, along with a rosary ring and an Our Father ring.
- I observe Lenten tradition and do not eat meat on Fridays (an Italian-Catholic thing), haven't my entire life (there have been fluke occurrences).
- I have St. Antonio tattooed as a half-sleeve

Religion, like everything in life, requires an evolution of sorts and a shit-ton of so-called, "dogma," that you talk about, has to be eschewed or completely gone against; every religion is chock full of hypocrisies and paradoxes, thus on occasion, it's impossible to act, speak or think one way that is acceptable, while at the same time not going against another teaching.

For example, Jesus was a walking Golden Rule observer, yet if we are to follow his lead and treat everyone how he/we wished to be treated, why am I not allowed to bring a raised and Catholic-following friend to church with me, because he's gay? I have to turn him away and shun him, because his lifestyle is viewed as sin in the eyes of the faith I believe in?

And there are a lot more paradoxes where that came from.

Therefore, all of this, "dogma," which attempts to create black and white scenarios, cannot be adhered to in an increasingly grey world. Period. Accept it. You even said so yourself:


And there's your evolution! One piece of, "dogma," that has been eschewed.

But then you mention:

(which it isn't)

So what is it? Is the doctrine sound? Or is it that not everything has to be followed to the letter in 2020, due to a significantly more-complicated world than it was 1800 years ago?

Anyways, this is a discussion for another thread and I'm rambling to death anyways. Basically, I know from what I see, experience, think and do daily, that I'm a helluvalot of a better Catholic (in terms of adhering to the doctrine) than 95% of the ones I've spent my entire life around and that is completely non-hyperbolic.

Did you just say signs isn’t infallible? Why are you still pretending? There are hundreds of churches that evolve as you like. And who told you you can’t bring a gay man to church and that you must shun him?

Im not sure why you quoted me those two times. Did you think there was a contradiction? That’s not dogma.

I have a feeling you don’t know Catholic dogma very well. That’s not meant as an insult but maybe you should read them all. As a Catholic, you are required to accept them.

[Truck_1_0_1_]

(08-25-2020, 09:10 PM)michaelsean Wrote: Did you just say signs isn’t infallible? Why are you still pretending? There are hundreds of churches that evolve as you like. And who told you you can’t bring a gay man to church and that you must shun him?

Im not sure why you quoted me those two times. Did you think there was a contradiction? That’s not dogma.

I have a feeling you don’t know Catholic dogma very well. That’s not meant as an insult but maybe you should read them all. As a Catholic, you are required to accept them.

You know there are actually upward of 400 dogmas, right?

The dogmas are represented in the Nicene Creed (of which I can recite in Italian and English, thus I am more than aware of them) and are the basic groundwork for the faith; of which all are expected to be believed.

However, I have never actually been sat down and taught these dogmas, in any church or school setting, thus we were talking about two different things (you, Dogmas, me, teachings and truths, mainly through scripture) and I indeed was confused.

[*michaelsean*]

(08-25-2020, 10:23 PM)Truck_1_0_1_ Wrote: You know there are actually upward of 400 dogmas, right?

The dogmas are represented in the Nicene Creed (of which I can recite in Italian and English, thus I am more than aware of them) and are the basic groundwork for the faith; of which all are expected to be believed.

However, I have never actually been sat down and taught these dogmas, in any church or school setting, thus we were talking about two different things (you, Dogmas, me, teachings and truths, mainly through scripture) and I indeed was confused.

Ironically, the amount of education I received is what made me realize I’m in no way a Catholic.

[*Nately120*]

When I think of my catholic upbringing I mostly focus on the holy water containers everyone stuck their hands into, the single chalice of wine everyone drank from, and the whole "peace be with you" hand shaking thing and wonder if the purpose of that sect wasn't just to spread illness and thin out the dastardly Irish and Italian population.

[*bfine32*]

Kudos to the folks at UND:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/notre-dame-distances-itself-from-ex-football-coach-lou-holtz-after-his-comments-in-rnc-speech/ar-BB18rtsj

Quote:"Moreover, we Catholics should remind ourselves that while we may judge the objective moral quality of another’s actions, we must never question the sincerity of another’s faith, which is due to the mysterious working of grace in that person’s heart," Jenkins said.

When folks around here have said "Trump is not a Christian" I've taken the same stance that Father Jenkins did here.

Lou and others are free to give their thoughts on what makes a "good" Christian, but we should NEVER say someone that professes to be, is not. 

[GMDino]

(08-28-2020, 10:01 PM)bfine32 Wrote: Kudos to the folks at UND:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/sports/ncaafb/notre-dame-distances-itself-from-ex-football-coach-lou-holtz-after-his-comments-in-rnc-speech/ar-BB18rtsj

When folks around here have said "Trump is not a Christian" I've taken the same stance that Father Jenkins did here.

Lou and others are free to give their thoughts on what makes a "good" Christian, but we should NEVER say someone that professes to be, is not. 

I understand the entire "we can't know what's in his heart" bit, honest I do.

But one cannot act and speak one way all the time for their entire life and then tell you they are another.  We all make judgement on others based on what we see and hear, fair or not, and if you see someone beat his wife with a belt every day for his entire life and then tells the neighbor what a great husband he is in his heart I wouldn't believe it.

If DJT is any kind of "Christian" in his private life I'd love to see it.  In any way.  Something.  Because there has been zero he has done to display a Christian heart or any sense of religion.  Or ethics.  Or empathy.

But I'll be open to examples if they can be presented.

[Fan_in_Kettering]

Absolutely not.

[BmorePat87]

Should Democrats practice Catholicism?