Ask a Catholic

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Teuthida

Interesting stuff about the trinity. Thanks.


Ok, so if it's having a barrier that's the problem then sex while not completely naked shouldn't be allowed either right? Leaving your socks on should be just as bad.

I think you're missing my point slightly. The barrier that seperates procreation from the procreative act (sex) is the issue. The Church makes no requirement that spouses be completely naked during sex. If this were the case, there would be no Catholic children concieved in Canada between the months of October and May.

[Professor S]

Just to clarify, I never thought that celibacy led to pedophilia, only that it would attract those looking for a religious cure. The John Jay study is interesting, but it only compares priests against the general population. I would like to see a study against the rates of clergy from other religions that allow marriage.

But moreso, if celibacy isn't called for in the Bible, why mandate it for priests?

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Professor S

Just to clarify, I never thought that celibacy led to pedophilia, only that it would attract those looking for a religious cure. The John Jay study is interesting, but it only compares priests against the general population. I would like to see a study against the rates of clergy from other religions that allow marriage.

But moreso, if celibacy isn't called for in the Bible, why mandate it for priests?

Yes, I realized the true focus of your question after my long response, but decided to keep it because it was worthwhile information.

Finding statistics on non-celibate clergy has been difficult. I've only found one source of information. link That article quotes a study by Penn State (ironic) professor Phillip Jenkins title Pedophiles and Priests in which pedophile rates among Catholic priests are placed at between 0.2 and 1.7 percent and among protestant clergy it is placed at between 2 and 3 percent.

The basic truth is that few have looked at the issue with any real scholarly intent and therefore, little exists in the way of solid statistical evidence. I've only found two scholarly studies on Catholic Priests and almost nothing on other denominations. The nature of the Protestant church makes this difficult. There are 40,000+ Protestant denominations and the decentralized nature makes it difficult to compare across denominations. The link I posted in my previous post from Wikipedia even makes it clear that we have little understanding of the issue at large even amongst the general population.

The simplest answer to why priests are called to be celibate is that priests are called to be fathers to all the faithful and not just biologically related offspring. The Church futher emphasizes this by statingthat a priest marries the Church through his priestly vows. It is a devotion to the Church that is akin to a husband's devotion to his wife.

It has a practical aspect as well, priests make around $25,000 to $30,000 and according to some sources, much less. You would have a difficult time raising a family on that. In addition, who pays to send any children to a Catholic school or other expenses related to raising a family?

The Catholic priest is called to focus on the faithful as his family.

[jeepnut]

That's it? No more questions? I was really enjoying this.

[Combine 017]

ummmm, why do you portray god as such a good guy? With all the bad stuffs going on it just seems like he doesnt really care. If hes so great why doesnt he smite the bad guys with his smite stick?

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Combine 017

ummmm, why do you portray god as such a good guy? With all the bad stuffs going on it just seems like he doesnt really care. If hes so great why doesnt he smite the bad guys with his smite stick?

Because if that were to happen, there would be no free will.

I appreciate the questions Combine. However, I get the distinct impression that you're not really interested in my answers.

[Combine 017]

Originally Posted by jeepnut

Because if that were to happen, there would be no free will.

I appreciate the questions Combine. However, I get the distinct impression that you're not really interested in my answers.

That one was just to bump, I was interested in the other ones though. They arent the most thought provoking questions, but they are things I found dumb about religion and such. Theres so much evidence behind science and evolution and whatever and yet some groups choose to blatantly ignore it. It makes me go all.

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Combine 017

That one was just to bump, I was interested in the other ones though. They arent the most thought provoking questions, but they are things I found dumb about religion and such. Theres so much evidence behind science and evolution and whatever and yet some groups choose to blatantly ignore it. It makes me go all.

Agreed. The correct response to a scientific discovery that challenges your faith is not to stick your head in the sand, but to learn about it and see how it fits with your understanding of God. Maybe your understanding needs refinement. But to wall yourselves off and create your own museums and your own school curiculums is willful ignorance.

If God is real, then religion has nothing to fear from science. Science hasn't disproven God yet and anyone specifically using science to do so is foolish.

[Teuthida]

I have a question about the bible itself. Who do Catholics believe wrote it? The two testaments are hundreds (thousands?) of years apart. Is it the word of god as written by prophets? Couldn't there have been a mistranslation? Especially the new testament which was first Greek...then Latin...then English? (Not looking any of this up myself so you can answer ) A lot of the rules seem like they're purely of their time (and if written by a whole bunch of people, they'd surely have their own views on things and include them). Why stick with them in the modern era? Is that why there's the whole picking and choosing thing going on, with some rules being followed strictly and others completely ignored? Who decides which rules to follow? The pope in your case?

Follow up question to that last bit: The pope is the word of God right? Or God is suppose to talk to him? But isn't the pope voted in? Doesn't it seem a bit silly that God would be like: "Oh this is the guy you want me to talk to? Well, ok. You did vote on it and all. " Or do I have that completely wrong and he's just there to govern the religious matters according to his own views on things?

Dunno if you ever saw this. Pretty interesting. Dude follows the bible to the tee for a full year.

[Teuthida]

Oh! The whole confession thing! It rubs me the wrong way that you could do horrible things, tell a priest, say a couple prayers a bunch of times, and be forgiven like nothing ever happened.

Feels like without that clause you'd be less likely to do bad things if you had to live with your bad choices.

Not really a question I guess. Just what are your thoughts on that?

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Teuthida

Oh! The whole confession thing! It rubs me the wrong way that you could do horrible things, tell a priest, say a couple prayers a bunch of times, and be forgiven like nothing ever happened.

Feels like without that clause you'd be less likely to do bad things if you had to live with your bad choices.

Not really a question I guess. Just what are your thoughts on that?

Well, that is the way it works, sorta. True, you can do horrible things and God will forgive. There is no sin too great for the redeeming power of Christ.

BUT...you have to mean it. You have to be truly sorry for what you did AND you have to desire never to do it again. If you do something with the belief that you will just apologize later, then you're not truly sorry. God knows our hearts and what we truly feel.

I'll answer your other question at a later time. This one was a little easier so I answered it first.

Also, are these answers worthwhile? Do they make sense/clear up anything? If not, let me know. What makes sense to me is probably different than what makes sense to you since I've grown up with this my whole life. Feel free to ask follow-up questions.

[Combine 017]

Originally Posted by jeepnut

Well, that is the way it works, sorta. True, you can do horrible things and God will forgive. There is no sin too great for the redeeming power of Christ.

BUT...you have to mean it. You have to be truly sorry for what you did AND you have to desire never to do it again. If you do something with the belief that you will just apologize later, then you're not truly sorry. God knows our hearts and what we truly feel.

So kinda like that guy who cut off another guys head while riding a bus then cut off the heads ears and ate them, but said it was the voice of god that told him to do it and repented or whatever. So that fucking insane guy gets to go to heaven?

[Teuthida]

Originally Posted by jeepnut

Also, are these answers worthwhile? Do they make sense/clear up anything? If not, let me know. What makes sense to me is probably different than what makes sense to you since I've grown up with this my whole life. Feel free to ask follow-up questions.

What about workarounds to rules? Like I assume you stand by no sex before marriage, and that goes with the no condom thing, but then there are folks who engage in anal before marriage because it "doesn't count."

Contraception as a safety method just makes far more sense than half doing part of some rule few will follow.

Reminded of another related video... NSFW

[jeepnut]

Originally Posted by Teuthida

I have a question about the bible itself. Who do Catholics believe wrote it? The two testaments are hundreds (thousands?) of years apart. Is it the word of god as written by prophets? Couldn't there have been a mistranslation? Especially the new testament which was first Greek...then Latin...then English? (Not looking any of this up myself so you can answer ) A lot of the rules seem like they're purely of their time (and if written by a whole bunch of people, they'd surely have their own views on things and include them). Why stick with them in the modern era? Is that why there's the whole picking and choosing thing going on, with some rules being followed strictly and others completely ignored? Who decides which rules to follow? The pope in your case?

Follow up question to that last bit: The pope is the word of God right? Or God is suppose to talk to him? But isn't the pope voted in? Doesn't it seem a bit silly that God would be like: "Oh this is the guy you want me to talk to? Well, ok. You did vote on it and all. " Or do I have that completely wrong and he's just there to govern the religious matters according to his own views on things?

Dunno if you ever saw this. Pretty interesting. Dude follows the bible to the tee for a full year.

Sorry it's taken me so long to respond. I have been researching this question to make sure I get it right, but I kept running out of time to actually type up a response. I don't have much time now, but I'm going to do my best.

The bible has many writers spanning thousands of years. It is a collection of books with no single writer. The Catholic Church assembled the bible from those works believed to be inspired by God. Through the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, these writers recorded what was revealed to them by God. Therefore, God is the author of the bible. Each writing must be taken in context with the time it was written and our understanding of the person who wrote it, but each is divinely inspired.

Mistranslations are possible and do exist, although not to the degree you might imagine. There are several versions of the bible and some are better than others for different reasons. Some are more literal translations and some focus more on accurately transcribing the meaning into our modern languages. However, despite this, we are blessed to have many ancient manuscripts from the bible, some dating to just a few years after the books were originally written. Through these pieces of the bible, we can assure ourselves that our modern translations are accurate.

As far as the rules of the bible, there are a few things that must be understood. First, as mentioned above, everything in the bible must be understood in context both within the time/culture it was written and within context to the rest of the bible. Secondly, there are two main types of laws in the bible. There is the ceremonial law and there is the law of Christ. Jesus fulfilled the ceremonial law and therefore, it is no longer binding on Christians. I never has been. It was only binding on those upon whom it was delivered; the Jews. The ceremonial laws include such laws as many of the ones followed in the video you posted. Because of this, following everything in the bible literally is a pointless (although interesting) exercise. Christians are still bound however by the law of Christ which includes natural law. These include many of the requirements from the New Testament and some from the Old Testament. Most visible would probably be the ten commandments or Jesus's commandment to "Love the Lord your God with your whole heart and love your neighbor as yourself."

The Pope is the leader of the Church on earth and the successor to Saint Peter. The Cardinals choose the Pope, but are guided by the Holy Spirit. This does not mean that all Popes are perfect (they are human), but there election is guided by God. As Jesus said, (I'm not quoting this directly, but the gist is there), "And I say to you, you are Peter and upon this rock I will build my Church and the gates of hell will not prevail against it." If we believe what Jesus is saying (protip: we do), then we can be assured that the Church is protected by God. This is why whenever a new Pope is selected, you should laugh at the media as they stupidly assume it to be like any other earthly election and ask if the Pope will change any of the Church's teachings. The Pope will not. His main purpose is to preserve the Church. Anyone who thinks the Pope will change the Church's teachings on women priests, homosexuality, contraception, etc. doesn't understand the Church and how it is not a human institution, but a divine one.

Sorry if any of that is unclear. I typed this up relatively quickly, so apologies if it is confusing or wrongly worded. I'll answer the other questions as soon as I can.

[Teuthida]

Thanks for the response. Makes sense. Although the whole notion of the Holy Spirit guiding so much seems to remove free will to an certain extent. I actually don't know the Church's stance on that. Free will? Yea or nay?

If the old testament rules are mostly void, then why follow so many of them? The whole anti-homosexual thing is from that portion correct?

Quick wikipedia search led me to:

Passages in the Old Testament book Leviticus that prohibit "lying with mankind as with womankind" and the story of Sodom and Gomorrah have historically been interpreted as condemning homosexual acts, as have several Pauline passages. Other interpreters, however, maintain that these passages do not condemn homosexuality, saying that historical context suggests other interpretations or that rare or unusual words in the passages may not be referring to homosexuality.

So yeah, what's the deal with being anti-gay?

Sorry I'm asking questions quicker than you can answer. I do find this stuff fascinating though.