 sj |
||
|
||
BS: The Pope in America
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 24 Oct 15 - 06:18 PM teach them too the evidence against evolutionism. Yup. Batshit crazy. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link Date: 24 Oct 15 - 06:15 PM Joe, I,m none the wiser from your answer to my question, but I suspect further probing will not produce anything to answer the question. And why tell me Steve, why the laws of nature cannot allow an eternal creator God, who creates those laws, along with the substance of them as relating to said laws. On the contrary, the laws of nature as we know them , as best I can see, does not permit life arising from non life , or an effect without a sufficient cause. Such considerations of origins , is consistent wth there being an eternal creator God, but inconsistent with evolutionism claiming to be operating according to laws of nature. Your oft repeated charge that the Romans must have written about Jesus in his earthly lifetime is an argument from silence , and does not address the many instances of non biblical ....as well as biblical....quotes relating to Christ and the early church not so ling after. And if you want to teach kids the supposed evidence against the gospels, then teach them too the evidence against evolutionism. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 24 Oct 15 - 05:12 PM Corporal punishment was still routine in boys schools in England in the fifties, and for years after. There was almost a kind of rivalry about knocking up a score. Probably worked better as a threat hanging over you than when actually used, when it rapidly ceased to affect your behaviour too much. I suppose it made us less disruptive in class. Nothing to do with religion, either way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 24 Oct 15 - 12:30 PM I got my 16 years of Catholic education in the United States in the 1950s and 1960s, and it was a good experience for me. We had In the other schools, the worst punishment was detention - staying after school for an hour or less, usually having to write something over and over. I know a lot of Irish-born priests and nuns, and their experience in school was similar to mine - perhaps a bit stricter, but not harsh. The only American Catholics I know from England are of Irish ancestry, and their experience was the same. I know lots of former Catholics from the U.S., England, and Ireland who had a bad experience in Catholic school. Is it any wonder why they aren't Catholics any more? I have no doubt that a harsh Mother Superior or a dictatorial pastor can turn an entire institution into a hellhole - but a lot of Catholics had a much more positive experience. And many had a mixed experience, where the good outweighed the bad. And many who are prone to absolutist, literalist thinking left the Catholic Church because they could not understand the nuances and abstractions. We've had many neoconservative movements within the Catholic Church, since Vatican II - and one neoconservative Pope, John Paul II. They have tried their best to impose absolutist thinking on the Church - but so far, their results have been mixed. Can't say I know which side is winning - but I doubt that either side will ever win full control. Like it or not, churches are political institutions that will forever shift from one perspective to the next. Pete, you have no doubt noticed that the Gospels do not describe the conception or birth of Jesus, his childhood, or his resurrection. Those things are left to the imagination. I'm sure my imagination understands these mysteries and others differently from the way yours does. I believe all the basic doctrines of the Christian faith, but I'm sure I understand many of them differently. -Joe Offer- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,apostated Date: 24 Oct 15 - 10:40 AM Stop sniveling about your horrible educations, scheesh. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 24 Oct 15 - 10:27 AM "Validity comes from corroberation" Which is what I meant by the way anecdotal evidence can be reinforced by subsequent anecdotes. A single observation is an anecdote. It's just not the case that the Romans kept detailed records about trials and executions, at least none that have survived. After all, this wasn't even about a Roman citizen. An awful lot of the issues about things that happened a generation or so back are primarily about how things generally were in institutions like schools, nothing particularly to do with the religious ethos. Physical punishment and authoritarian teaching was how it was, and Catholic schools reflected that. Things have changed - and in a few years down we'll have people writing about how rotten it was back now, for different reasons. Swings and roundabouts. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Dave the Gnome Date: 24 Oct 15 - 08:38 AM Steve - :-D |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 24 Oct 15 - 06:15 AM I can think of several people the "education" had a severe effect on. Even today I can go up behind one person in particular and whisper four words "****(his name)to the office" and make him a shivering wreck. He is an intelligent man who has had a relatively successful career and can still be brought down by four words. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Oct 15 - 06:13 AM What, like you mean they stayed being Catholics?. :-) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Dave the Gnome Date: 24 Oct 15 - 05:32 AM No - don't get me wrong - my experience was not traumatic either. I was just saying what I know went on. Luckily I was happy to tow the line all the way up to my teens when I realised there was something not right so I was never subject to the wrath of some of the teachers. I also know that other teachers were equally disturbed by this indoctrination and would have no part of it. There is also 50 years between me having left junior school and now so my memory of it could be tainted. I do know however that it affected some people in a far worse way than it affected me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 24 Oct 15 - 05:08 AM Well I can't say that my experience was overly traumatic. Indoctrination was rife and daily, however. Its ineffectiveness on the rebel me (I started early) is reflected in the fact that I can recall the detail mostly of the stupider things that were said, Catholics being superior to everyone else and unbaptised babies never seeing God, etc. At frequent intervals the timetable was suspended to make way for "retreats" in which we were told to pray to Our Lady and gaze heavenwards whenever we were washing our private parts. There was not a female of any description in the school except for the matron, and her fierce demeanour cast doubt on even that. I didn't stop being a devout Catholic for quite a few years after that. That "education" sowed seeds of a slowly-increasing derision for the doctrine and a loss of trust later on in the people of the cloth in my seven years' teaching in a Catholic school. It was a long haul but life is so much nicer here in the sunlit uplands! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Shimrod Date: 24 Oct 15 - 04:25 AM I note that the batty shitty smell is back again - and just when I thought that I'd cleaned up that belfry! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: DMcG Date: 24 Oct 15 - 04:03 AM I don't know why, but I always lump primary and junior school together in my mind: if I say one I almost always mean both. My time at a Catholic grammar school was 'interesting'. Apart from the daily assembly and a couple of RI classes a week there was little religious bent. Some teachers opened their lessons with a prayer, but these were the minority and it was perceived as more of a quirk of that teacher than anything else. The headmaster changed in my second year and it certainly moved in the direction of being less authoritarian than it had been before. There was physical punishment in the form of a leather strap on the hands, but that was mainly for failing to do homework or on occasion behaviours. I do remember one lesson in particular where the teacher was late and so people started talking. When he came back he complained about the noise, lined us up outside and spent the entire forty minutes walking along the line strapping each person in turn. Sounds bad, I know, and definitely part of the school culture, but religion based? I think not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Raggytash Date: 24 Oct 15 - 03:38 AM DMcG It was not just primary school it was also Junior School and the Grammar School (run by monks) I attended. The Jesuits have a statement attributed to them "give me the child until he is seven and I will give you the man" This, to me, demonstrates quite clearly the indoctrination of the catholic church on young and impressionable minds. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: DMcG Date: 24 Oct 15 - 02:46 AM There is not a clear line between anecdote and verified fact, or repeated observation and a 'law'. I recommend people read Hume's "On Miracles". No matter how often we observe something happening or not happening it is a leap to say it always/never happens. And talking of anecdotal evidence: my experience of UKCatholic primary schools iwas nothing like that of Dave and Raggy, and my honest assessment is that I would probably have 'left the church' as well if it had been. We all fall short when it comes to "practicing what we preach" but there is a point where they are so far out of line that the whole caboodle becomes intolerable and I quite believe that's how I would have felt as well with the experience they both had. Yes, there were oddities like processions through the town every Corpus Christi but actually that was seen as an event for the whole town with a huge turn-out of people watching, big spreads in the local paper and what-not, but odd nevertheless. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 09:01 PM Spot on. Validity comes from corroboration. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 23 Oct 15 - 08:11 PM f enough anecdotes reinforce each other, the evidence becomes stronger. But it doesn't become valid. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 07:35 PM "then how can you say that a creator breaks the laws of nature" Very simple. No law of nature that we know of permits a supernatural being, all-seeing, all knowing, all-powerful with no beginning and no end, to exist. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 07:27 PM On Aesop: ... like those who dine well off the plainest dishes, he made use of humble incidents to teach great truths, and after serving up a story he adds to it the advice to do a thing or not to do it. Then, too, he was really more attached to truth than the poets are; for the latter do violence to their own stories in order to make them probable; but he by announcing a story which everyone knows not to be true, told the truth by the very fact that he did not claim to be relating real events. [Apollonius of Tyana, 1st century AD] So, Aesop could do it, and I could do it with my kids. Use a story to illustrate a truth, but being abundantly clear that the story was a story, just that, not something that actually happened. I ask again: Christianity, wassup with you? Why are you so scared of telling children the truth? Don't you believe that they can take it? Isn't it a damn sight harder for them to swallow your myths and then, untold, have to try to sort out myth from reality themselves? Why do you put such a burden on your children? You have absolutely no reason to lie to your children, so the only conclusion is that you are indulging in child abuse in the cause of keeping up the numbers. Here's your truth: there may have been no Jesus. There is no contemporary Roman record of Jesus, which is too amazing to be true (except that it is). The Romans wrote so much down about everything, avidly. But no mention of a Jesus. The only mentions are by his followers. Yet it was the Romans whose noses he supposedly got up. Have you told your kids this? Or have you just stuck to water to wine, Lazarus up from the dead, crucified then back to life? Really, how honest are you with your kids? Have you told them how much the much-vaunted four gospels disagree with each other? Have you told them about all the other suppressed gospels? Why won't you be straight with your kids? Do you really think that they won't be able to see reality unless it's presented as myth? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Peter from seven stars link Date: 23 Oct 15 - 06:46 PM Some posts up Steve says " we don't know all the laws of nature and we have,nt cracked all the mysteries of the one we do know ". If that is so , then how can you say that a creator breaks the laws of nature. But at the same time, such suggestion serves as a get out for when evolutionism DOES break known laws of nature !. " the people who put (it) there, by so doing , make (it) look idiotic." |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Oct 15 - 06:44 PM Anecdotes are of course evidence. Just not in themselves authoritative evidence. If enough anecdotes reinforce each other, the evidence becomes stronger. .............. You still seem convinced, Steve, that children are completely malleable at first, and then become fixed in whatever they are told as children. It just ain't so, as you yourself surely know from your own experience. That applies just as much whether they are taught the stories they are told are true or that they are open to doubt, or even that they are not true. What they believe as adults, or as teenagers, will be what they believe as adults or as teenagers. Or even as children. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 06:43 PM I am absolutely not in the remotest bit interested in anyone proving anything in science or religion. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link Date: 23 Oct 15 - 06:35 PM That should be.....that it can only be.... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 23 Oct 15 - 06:26 PM It is anecdotal indeed, Greg. Does that make it any less valid? Yes. It does. Research it for yourself, and you'll find that is indeed the case. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link Date: 23 Oct 15 - 06:23 PM Well Steve, I would go along with kids questioning unproven religious beliefs , especially when they are presented as science . Any thing presented as fact without evidence that can only be interpreted in only one way, is religious in nature in at least some respects. I rather suspect evolutionists like it that way.....ie kids just taking it on faith!. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 06:17 PM "There isn't always such a clear difference between the myth and the historic facts." Fine. I accept that. So why don't you explain that to children? I certainly wouldn't have had any difficulty with my two. Convince me please that the Catholic Church is so concerned about the wellbeing of children that it does all in its power to be as honest as it can be about its teachings. My view is that the Church's priority is to keep up the numbers by filling kids' minds with myths that are terribly hard to shake off. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Pete from seven stars link Date: 23 Oct 15 - 06:13 PM Joe, your post on 12:52 pm, is an example of the sort of post that caused me to question whether you believed in the ressurection, and to which you seemed to be offended by ,stating that all Christians believe in the ressurection. But if you think the gospels are myths and not fact, how do you know if you can reliably believe in the ressurection. I suppose you will think me a pain in the ....., for asking ! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Oct 15 - 05:52 PM There isn't always such a clear difference between the myth and the historic facts. A real person and real events can take on a mythical status. Che Guevara for example. It seems to me far more reasonable, on the basis of the evidence, to accept that Jesus existed, and taught, and was crucified, rather than that it was all made up by some imagined fraudster with a golden tongue who managed to convince a load of naive people to throw over eveything and go and get killed for a fiction. How far the words and the events in the Gospels were historically accurate, and how far they are reconstrunctions for kerigmatic exposition is unknown and unknowable. But it is reasonable to recognise them as having a powerful and continuing mythological force, whatever we might think about that unknown. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 05:17 PM "The thing about myths is that they are a way of saying true things. At least, that's one definition of myths." That works really well as long as you know that myths are myths. I learned a lot as a little lad from Aesop's Fables but I knew damn well that the stories were made up. Christianity tells stories that it does not tell children are made up. The opposite, in fact. The teaching, the hymns and the prayers all assert the truth of the stories. You are asking an awful lot of little children when you expect them to separate reality from mythology when confronted with that context. They have not got the life experience to make the distinction, and it is more than reasonable to suspect that Christianity rather likes it that way. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Oct 15 - 03:52 PM It is anecdotal indeed, Greg. Does that make it any less valid? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Oct 15 - 03:37 PM I'm not "separating science from all that's the best in humanity". It's part of the best in humanity. So are other lots of other things. No need to see it as a competition. As for "science is the most fun thing imaginable", good for you. Playing music with friends I'd rate higher, but who's measuring these things anyway? The thing about myths is that they are a way of saying true things. At least, that's one definition of myths. I suspect that parents who go in too hard with your approach, Steve are only too likely to find their kids turning out to be Jehovah's Witnesses or Scientologists. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Greg F. Date: 23 Oct 15 - 02:46 PM Anecdotal evidence isn't. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Oct 15 - 02:42 PM That was your experience, Dave, and that's how you recall them. Mine was different. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 02:34 PM If mindless literalism is such a bugbear, then why do you risk its perpetuation by telling children that myth is true? Why not just tell them the truth? There's a piece in tomorrow's Guardian by the food critic Jay Rayner, railing against the dismal practice in some eateries of having a "children's menu". Children are more than capable of eating food from the grown-up menu, and he proved it by taking his kids to the Fat Duck, which has has one of the most sophisticated menus of any restaurant. Making them eat eat bland, safe food is bad education in enjoying food.. So give your kids the grown-up stuff. Tell them the truth, that much of the Bible may be based on myth, that Jesus may or may not have existed, that they should ask for evidence about God. Kids can take the truth and they'll trust you for ever if you give it to them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Dave the Gnome Date: 23 Oct 15 - 02:04 PM Joe, we are obviously discussing 2 different implementations of the catholic faith. I have no idea how the catholic schools were run in the USA and you have no idea what it was like in Catholic schools in England in the 50s and 60s. I can confirm what raggy says. As I am sure Steve can and many others here. The rules were horrendous, as were the enforcement of them. The punishments for not attending communion on a holy day ranged from 30 minutes kneeling in front of a statue to expulsion for repeated offences. This was for 5 to 11 year olds. Until you understand what the abuse that some suffered you will never understand why so many feel that religion is such a bad thing. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 01:07 PM I don't know why you are separating science from all the best that's in humanity. Scientific endeavour is the most human of all our activities along with culture. You may not consciously apply the scientific process in all its elements to looking at sentence structure, but, just like science, you are looking for patterns and processes and applying previously-gained knowledge and experience. Science is the most fun thing imaginable. It fires curiosity and imagination and promotes a deep appreciation of the world. It isn't all boiling tubes and lab coats! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Joe Offer Date: 23 Oct 15 - 12:52 PM Raggytash says: Joe, I don't know if teaching of the catholic church has altered radically since I was a child in the late 50's early 60's but the "stories" you refer to were told as the absolute truth then and God help you if you didn't believe them. That was certainly true in some parishes, Raggytash. And there were some dioceses that were dominated by that sort of mindless literalism. But even in the most rigid dioceses, there were parishes where thinking was much more directed toward the spiritual meaning of the ancient writings. And conversely, the most progressive dioceses have had pockets of stern rigidity. The Catholic Church is not monolithic, and never has been. Catholic thinking covers a broad spectrum, and official doctrine is far less restrictive than one might think. Still, the rigid literalists were a pain in the ass - and still are. Even those near-heretical Jesuits have a few literalists in their midst. -Joe- |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Oct 15 - 10:52 AM My point being that while science is fascinating and productive and all kinds of great things, it's only part of the picture. All kinds of things about how we live in the world are only peripherally related to scientific methods and purposes. It's possible to be scientific about sentence structure and body language, and the way we communicate and so forth, and that could even help us do it better, but it wouldn't touch on what human relationships are really about. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 09:35 AM That's right, but you said it: not beyond. As for mathematics, unlike science, there can be proofs and end-points. Mathematics is there for us to discover and tease out; science is a very human process which can have neither proofs nor end-points. When it comes to art and music, they can be studied on many levels, or not really studied at all, just enjoyed. Personally, I want to know all there is to know about Beethoven because I want to get closer to gleaning how that flawed human being could deliver himself of some of the greatest art that humanity has ever produced. But the music, on at least one level, is enough in itself to satisfy aesthetic need. In that regard it can temporarily part company with science. In science, the next step of the enquiry is always The Big Thing. But, in music, the more you know, the more sharply you can respond. There's a bit of a parallel with the scientific process there. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 23 Oct 15 - 09:10 AM Rembrant and Mozart aren't "beyond science", but scientific methodology is pretty irrelevant about them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Time stamp Date: 23 Oct 15 - 09:06 AM I'm not laying out my thoughts Steve because we then have to get into what is consciousness and reality then quantum physics and we would be all over the place, it would turn into a mess. John Hagelin yt him he has some interesting informed thoughts. I'm offline now until tonight. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: DMcG Date: 23 Oct 15 - 08:29 AM Why does this b@#@( phone have the erase and enter key next to each other? As I was Saying: true, but that is a bit different. I will have one more bash and then leave it. There are lots of things we know don't exist, such as ten euclidean solids. It doesn't matter how long we search we won't find one. We can definitely prove there are no more. There are a number of unsolved mathematical problems where we don't know whether a solution is feasible or not. And they may have no solution. I just admit the possibility that there might be analogies in the real world that are inherently beyond the scientific method however long we look. There may be none. There may be lots we just haven't spotted because we imagine they will yield to a little more of the same method we are using. None of which says we should devalue the scientific method. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: DMcG Date: 23 Oct 15 - 08:16 AM Truw |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 07:47 AM Well just think back to 100, 50, 20 years ago of the stuff we couldn't have dreamed of doing then that we're doing today. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: DMcG Date: 23 Oct 15 - 07:43 AM (damn phone again!) Not on the process but on what can be achieved through the process)! I am certain such a limit exists to scientific modelling of the world. What I am not certain about is whether that is a mere theoretical limit that is of no practical consequence or whether some of reality is outside the boundary. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 07:42 AM I might be but I've seen it more clearly articulated than that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: GUEST,Time stamp Date: 23 Oct 15 - 07:39 AM What about this notion of the universe's ever-increasing consciousness? I came across this after you'd stung me into looking things up. I think there a lot in it. Do you know what Mr Shaw, the human being has the potential to feel that expansion ..no, be that expansion and it's huge and it is just beautiful sweet potential..the sweet sweet nothing. Is that what you're after 8) Imho you're on the right track with that. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: DMcG Date: 23 Oct 15 - 07:38 AM I go on a bit about godel's incompleteness theorem but it is relevant because it talks about the limitations of mathematics and therefore, in a sense, a limit on science (not on the process |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 07:25 AM "Actually yes I am 8) because any further discussion between us would be fruitless. Like you said you're a simple man,me too,just I can't simplify this anymore I've already reduced it as far as I can. I could point you in the direction {and have done) of many who are trying to make scientific sense of it, but it would be lost on you and I totally understand. Can't think of anything else to say, you either see it or you don't." Sounds like a copout to me. What about this notion of the universe's ever-increasing consciousness? I came across this after you'd stung me into looking things up. I think there a lot in it. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: The Pope in America From: Steve Shaw Date: 23 Oct 15 - 07:09 AM "I grant you we know of no exceptions of major significance but things like turbulent flow could well prove to be inherently beyond science, not just our current techniques. So I see it as an open Question: are there aspects of reality that are inherently beyond science? I would say possibly, but on our current understanding they must be exceedingly rare." We shouldn't say that anything is inherently beyond science. Not even God. It's simplistic but true to say that the more we get to know, the more we find even greater complexities to solve. It's my guess that that will go on until the end of time. We don't know all the laws of nature and we haven't cracked all the mysteries of the ones we do know. Science is a never-ending process that, er, requires scientists (us). It isn't a static entity that things can be permanently beyond. It doesn't look for proofs or final answers. So I don't believe that anything is beyond that process. God is supposed to be. The people who put him there, by so doing, make him look so idiotic. |