To former Catholics - a reformed religion?

newmug

I have a question for all athiests out there, but in particular those who are former Catholics, or former Catholics who converted to something else.

If there was major reform of Catholicism, would you come back? If all religions were blended into one, universal acknowlegement of even the possibility of a supernatural diety, would you consider paying homage?

Sindri

I'll have to check but I'm pretty sure it's been done.

fitz0

Unless they reformed the notion of the supernatural altogether, dropped their homophobic policies, reversed their rulings on contraception, abortion and sex in general, revised their superior patrician mentality, apologized for all the mental and physical harm they've done to generations of kids and adults and gave all their money to a secular, worthy charity; unless they did all this then no.

The RCC is a vile organization and token changes won't change that.

But even with changes, I could never willingly return to any religion. As far as I'm concerned, that would take a serious effort of self-deception to even be a possibility.

EDIT: Why pay homage to a possibility? Would it be homage to the Pope? Or would it be a grand mullah or monk since they'd all be blended? It makes no sense.

Bannasidhe

Nope.
I am an atheist.
I do not believe there is a God.
This has nothing to do with the Roman Catholic Church or any other creed.

I happen to think the RCC is a vile institution. Many Christians also think so.

The Mad Hatter

^^ What Bannasidhe said.

swampgas

Where's the option that says that although I was once a Catholic, now I'm an atheist and regardless of how religion might change, I'm not going to start believing supernatural nonsense again?

Don't know about anyone else, but I'm an atheist that doesn't believe in the supernatural - it's got nothing to do with whether a religion is nasty or nice, it's got everything to do with the fact that religion is simply untrue.

lemarquis

I used to believe in the tooth fairy and in Santa Claus. I grew up and realised it was just a load of indoctrinated tosh designed, at least in part, to habituate my childish mind into accepting (having faith) in more sinister nonsense. I used to believe in god as is understood from the christian perspective. I grew up....... I am as likely to start believing again in the tooth fairy as I am in Christianity. At least you can't blame the tooth fairy for genocidal atrocities throughout the history of mankind.

I think a more interesting question for former catholics is:
Would they have still left the church if it wasn't not so plainly evil and intellectually dishonest before they left.

For some I would imagine the behaviour of the church and the silliness of the teachings were the things that started them questioning the beliefs.

For me the answer is: Yes, probably.

Penn

The Mad Hatter wrote: »

^^ What Bannasidhe said.

^^ What The Mad Hatter said.

Delirium

newmug wrote: »

I have a question for all athiests out there, but in particular those who are former Catholics, or former Catholics who converted to something else.

If there was major reform of Catholicism, would you come back? If all religions were blended into one, universal acknowlegement of even the possibility of a supernatural diety, would you consider paying homage?

No. At this stage in my life I don't feel like I'm missing out on anything by not being a member of any religion. To rejoin the RCC, they'd have to provide evidence for God otherwise there wouldn't be much point being a member.

They'd have to remove so many of their beliefs/dogmas that by the time they're done, people would think the RCC was no more and a humanist group had taken over the churches.

Extinction

You need to add an option in the poll that says 'There is no God so I won't consider going back to religion' if this atheist is to cast a vote. None of the current options apply to me.

Corkfeen

Erm... I don't get the logic of paying homage to something that I do not believe in. I was raised Catholic, I even altar served but my eventual lack of belief in a deity was not influenced by the various scandals. The various scandals only added to my distaste for the organisation.

Chuck Stone

There are no foxes in an atheist's hole.

joseph brand

newmug wrote: »

I have a question for all athiests out there, but in particular those who are former Catholics, or former Catholics who converted to something else.

If there was major reform of Catholicism, would you come back? If all religions were blended into one, universal acknowlegement of even the possibility of a supernatural diety, would you consider paying homage?

To put it another way.

I used to believe in the magic of Paul Daniels (gimme a break I was 7). Now Paul wants me to dedicate more of my time to believing in him, but 'Not-a-lot' is required? Hmmmmm, let me see. I can't force myself to believe what I know is bullsh1t. (pardon my French)

In terms of a 'healthy mind', in charge of it's faculties, this is impossible. Except for some major mental traumatic stress. (e.g. death in family)
They always get you when you're down. I wonder why?

The problem with me is, from the moment I wake, I am full of questions. (I blame my upbringing, college and this A&A forum) :rolleyes:

The bible teaches us to ask no questions, but 'trust in god/ jesus and the bible'. But to me, the clergy are 'Snake Oil Merchants', and we've moved on. We've seen their underhandedness, to put it as lightly as possible.

If someone wants to believe that a god made us and everything around us, that's fine. There's no need for a club. Keep it personal. The religious believe that they are 'spreading the good news', just like Coca Cola is 'spreading the good news' of it's product globally. To think there's a difference is naive.

What it ultimately boils down to is: Keep your nose out of other people's business when it doesn't concern you and you're not helping ANYONE! (e.g gay marriage)

Otherwise, we'll get along fine. Have your god. Have your religion. Just leave us alone for christ's god's goodness sake.

BTW, does anyone else feel that there are theist posters who stand to gain from proselytising and gaining converts? Obviously arguing with someone when it concerns their source of income is going to be an up-hill struggle, at best.

Part-time Atheists vs Full-time theists. If you know what I mean. (bread buttered)

(I'm drinking Bushmills and listening to lots of 80's music, if that excuses me from rambling) :D

mcmoustache

Would this new Catholicism involve deities and miracles and all that mad stuff?

If it got rid of that stuff, I'd consider it but as long as they still believe in nonsense I'll have to decline.

mcmoustache

joseph brand wrote: »

(I'm drinking Bushmills and listening to lots of 80's music, if that excuses me from rambling) :D

It was a rambly post but I enjoyed reading it. Keep drinking.

Lucy8080

I'm highly suspicious about the poll results here.

Maybe religious groups are not the only ones we should question .

Corkfeen

Lucy8080 wrote: »

I'm highly suspicious about the poll results here.

Maybe religious groups are not the only ones we should question .

The options give far too much credence to the existence of a deity and even the third option seems to veer towards posters being a doubting Thomas who is simply annoyed at the church. So I suspect that's the reason why number 4 is particularly popular.

the_syco

Change, as in random god pops down, cures all disease, and decides to make everyone happy? Otherwise, no.

joseph brand

Lucy8080 wrote: »

I'm highly suspicious about the poll results here.

Maybe religious groups are not the only ones we should question .

There's a poll?

I don't enter into idiotic polls.

(not directed at you, don't hate me)

newmug

Lucy8080 wrote: »

I'm highly suspicious about the poll results here.

Maybe religious groups are not the only ones we should question .

Well what options would you like? And what other groups would you add? I cant see the athiestic POV, so I just thought those options covered most bases. What poll options would you put to the poll question?

pauldla

It would need to be a pretty major reform, starting along the lines of 'There is no god'. Otherwise, no.

What is it about the atheist POV that eludes you? Many here would be happy to answer any questions you may have, and we'll even be nice about it!

Ellis Dee

newmug wrote: »

I have a question for all athiests out there, but in particular those who are former Catholics, or former Catholics who converted to something else.

If there was major reform of Catholicism, would you come back? If all religions were blended into one, universal acknowlegement of even the possibility of a supernatural diety, would you consider paying homage?

The only reform of Catholicism or any other religion that I would find really ground-breaking would be their finally realising that all the tales they tell about an invisible entity controlling everything is total malarkey. :rolleyes:

And then what woukld be the point of going back?:)

ShooterSF

Surely people who believe in the Christian god but find the RCC reprehensible would join an alternate Christian church rather than become an atheist? To stop believing because the catholic church acted like assholes is a pretty poor reason IMO.

joseph brand

pauldla wrote: »

It would need to be a pretty major reform, starting along the lines of 'There is no god'. Otherwise, no.

What is it about the atheist POV that eludes you? Many here would be happy to answer any questions you may have, and we'll even be nice about it!

Reminds me of the difference between the YouTube videos supporting christianity versus the videos supporting Atheism.

The christianity ones have ratings and/ or comments disabled.
Whereas the Atheism videos have ratings and comments enabled.

Crafty christians! /waves fist

joseph brand

Ellis Dee wrote: »

The only reform of Catholicism or any other religion that I would find really ground-breaking would be their finally realising that all the tales they tell about an invisible entity controlling everything is total malarkey. :rolleyes:

And then what would be the point of going back?:)

Joe Biden?

ShooterSF wrote: »

Surely people who believe in the Christian god but find the RCC reprehensible would join an alternate Christian church rather than become an atheist? To stop believing because the catholic church acted like assholes is a pretty poor reason IMO.

Sad christians, lost, like Little Bo Peep's sheep.

How do christians pick which flavour of christianity they like best. Do they test them out first? Visit the local anglican, prebyterian and evangelical churches and see which is the nicest? Kinda like Goldilocks checking out the beds.

I suppose, if there's a good salesman (priest/ vicar) in the first church visited, the lost individual may never get to visit the other churches. It's so sad.

@OP
I had a thought this morning: The clergy are just 'god's' middlemen. Isn't it always good to cut out the middlemen? Especially when they're doing stuff to children!

Also, isn't religion like an arranged marriage, that starts from birth? My parents didn't choose catholicism, and I certainly didn't pick it when I was ~ 6 weeks old. Couldn't even wipe my own ar*e!

pauldla

joseph brand wrote: »

How do christians pick which flavour of christianity they like best. Do they test them out first? Visit the local anglican, prebyterian and evangelical churches and see which is the nicest? Kinda like Goldilocks checking out the beds.

Years back I was working in a school in Hunan with a group of US evangelists.

I usually steered clear of talking religion with them, for obvious reasons. Well, to be honest, I usually steered clear of them full stop, but there were one or two I used to hang out with on occasion, and we'd discuss cabbages and kings, as you do. Or cabbages and King of Kings, as happened on one (and only one) occasion.

One of the guys (who I got on quite well with, actually), told me that his father had done just that: worked his way around the churches and denominations in his state to see which one he liked, and then told his family that that was their denomination. Don't know why he settled on the one he did.

Incidentally, during the same conversation he asked me my faith. I replied "Well, I was raised a Catholic, but now I suppose I'm more agnostic or atheist". He looked horrified and said "Catholic!?!?!?"

Ellis Dee

joseph brand wrote: »

Joe Biden?

Well spotted and guesed!:)

It was indeed Biden's delightful put-down of Ryan that reactivated the word "malarkey" in my vocabulary, where it had lain passive for many years after "hogwash" had replaced it:cool:

I just had to find an excuse to use it, and what better opportunity than in a discussion of anything to do with religion?:D:D:D

newmug

So lets just say, that they find some new particle at CERN, and it provides a breakthrough that proves there is a "supernatural" afterall, only this time it will be called the physically alternative natural. Because of this discovery, people can communicate with dead relatives. It turns out that Heaven and hell are real. One personality emerges, says that they're God, and that in order to get into Heaven, you have to follow his teachings, which includes following a religion. Of course, this person mightn't be God / a God at all, you just dont know.

Then would you join a religion?

And before anyone says "no point in answering this, it'll never happen", just muse me. I want to understand your train of thought. Go on.

swampgas

newmug wrote: »

So lets just say, that they find some new particle at CERN, and it provides a breakthrough that proves there is a "supernatural" afterall, only this time it will be called the physically alternative natural. Because of this discovery, people can communicate with dead relatives. It turns out that Heaven and hell are real. One personality emerges, says that they're God, and that in order to get into Heaven, you have to follow his teachings, which includes following a religion. Of course, this person mightn't be God / a God at all, you just dont know.

Then would you join a religion?

And before anyone says "no point in answering this, it'll never happen", just muse me. I want to understand your train of thought. Go on.

Anything that can be observed, tested, analysed and measured in a scientific way is no longer supernatural. And if the God of the Bible were real (Ha!), I would rather burn in hell than supplicate myself to such an odious creature.

newmug

swampgas wrote: »

Anything that can be observed, tested, analysed and measured in a scientific way is no longer supernatural. And if the God of the Bible were real (Ha!), I would rather burn in hell than supplicate myself to such an odious creature.

Thats why I said it would now be called the physically alternate natural. But its the same gig. So you would rather go to hell than Heaven?

newmug

newmug wrote: »

So lets just say, that they find some new particle at CERN, and it provides a breakthrough that proves there is a "supernatural" afterall, only this time it will be called the physically alternative natural. Because of this discovery, people can communicate with dead relatives. It turns out that Heaven and hell are real. One personality emerges, says that they're God, and that in order to get into Heaven, you have to follow his teachings, which includes following a religion. Of course, this person mightn't be God / a God at all, you just dont know.

Then would you join a religion?

And before anyone says "no point in answering this, it'll never happen", just muse me. I want to understand your train of thought. Go on.

If indisputable, unquestionable evidence for God's existence emerged such as what you're suggesting, then I'm sure most atheists would have their disbelief severely rattled, and likely begin to believe in a God — or at least an afterlife.

Still ... If the entity told me to follow the Catholic Church I'm not sure whether I could. I'd feel trapped, as if somebody had a gun to my head with the intention of forcing me to do something horrible: follow this organisation, which you thoroughly despise, in order to get into heaven, or be doomed to hell. I'm not sure what I'd do, to be honest: I'd probably begin to follow the church, but with a dull, sickening, almost claustrophobic feeling pervading my entire being. To be honest, I can't imagine anything worse: if that happened I'd call it hell, and I'd doubt that the real Hell could be much worse, so perhaps it would be better to live honestly, not follow the Church, and consign myself to the real Hell, which would be the lesser of two evils.

Delirium

newmug wrote: »

So lets just say, that they find some new particle at CERN, and it provides a breakthrough that proves there is a "supernatural" afterall, only this time it will be called the physically alternative natural. Because of this discovery, people can communicate with dead relatives. It turns out that Heaven and hell are real. One personality emerges, says that they're God, and that in order to get into Heaven, you have to follow his teachings, which includes following a religion. Of course, this person mightn't be God / a God at all, you just dont know.

Then would you join a religion?

And before anyone says "no point in answering this, it'll never happen", just muse me. I want to understand your train of thought. Go on.

No. I could possibly accept the idea that it was God, but I wouldn't see a reason to join a religion. God got a problem with that and condemns me to Hell, well he fails the Koth Deity Test (patent pending :P) and doesn't meet my standards of some that I would support/follow etc.

What about yourself, newmug? If the god appears and says Christianity is the wrong religion, do you abandon it and join the "correct" religion?

condra

If that happened, and it won't, it would just raise more questions, such as:

• Do I have free will?
• Am I a slave?
• Is it not hypocrytical do good things out of fear of damnation?
• Why did this supernatural being create disease, famine, and suffering?
• Why did this supernatural being create such an infiniitely huge universe, and what did he do with Earth for the 4 and a half billion years before we came along?

Also assuming it is the god of The Bible, questions like:

• What is this guys problem with women?
• Why do I have to worship this guy?
• What's with the ego and the vengeance?

So....

If I knew there was a "god" because of the evidence ... and had to follow a religion .... to avoid burning in Hell for all eternity... I probably would, reluctantly ... out of fear ...

There's my answer anyway.

newmug

koth wrote: »

What about yourself, newmug? If the god appears and says Christianity is the wrong religion, do you abandon it and join the "correct" religion?

I'd certainly re-evaluate things, but I dont want to give my opinion as what I have to say might influence the poll. I'm specifically asking ex-Catholic athiests, and secondarily just general athiests, not practicing Catholics like myself.

IRLConor

If there was evidence suggesting a deity with the same persuasive strength as the evidence supporting say... gravity then I'd probably believe in the existence of deities.

The deity wouldn't be supernatural though, pretty much by definition. "Physically alternative natural" sounds like you're trying to get "supernatural" in by the back door.

newmug wrote: »

Of course, this person mightn't be God / a God at all, you just dont know.

If I don't have any way of finding out if they're a deity or not then I have to assume that they're not. Too many David Koresh-alikes have cried wolf on that one I'm afraid.

Corkfeen

koth wrote: »

No. I could possibly accept the idea that it was God, but I wouldn't see a reason to join a religion. God got a problem with that and condemns me to Hell, well he fails the Koth Deity Test (patent pending :P) and doesn't meet my standards of some that I would support/follow etc.

What about yourself, newmug? If the god appears and says Christianity is the wrong religion, do you abandon it and join the "correct" religion?

Also if he hypothetically said Christianity was the correct faith. I'd have issues with worshiping a genocidal maniac. :pac:

newmug

And just to add another thing, if it was proven that there was a place we previously understood to be the supernatural (but obviously "natural" now that it has been observed), this person who would claim to be God wouldn't nescessarily have to be like the Biblical God. He could claim to be Thor, or An Dagda. But you would still have to submit to his awesomness and worship him in order not to be set on fire for ever. Would you?

condra

Perhaps newmug is God, and is doing a little research before "coming out".

IRLConor

newmug wrote: »

But you would still have to submit to his awesomness and worship him in order not to be set on fire for ever.

Why would the deity have to be a violent egomaniac? If we're dealing with hypothetical situations, couldn't the deity just be cool and a kind of live-and-let-live kinda dude? Wouldn't that be so much nicer? (Possibly even worth worshipping? )

condra

newmug wrote: »

you would still have to submit to his awesomness and worship him in order not to be set on fire for ever. Would you?

A bit like being forced to perform oral sex, with a gun to your head.

Hell yeah I'd do it.

:mad:

(nobody get any ideas, ok?)

Bannasidhe

newmug wrote: »

So lets just say, that they find some new particle at CERN, and it provides a breakthrough that proves there is a "supernatural" afterall, only this time it will be called the physically alternative natural. Because of this discovery, people can communicate with dead relatives. It turns out that Heaven and hell are real. One personality emerges, says that they're God, and that in order to get into Heaven, you have to follow his teachings, which includes following a religion. Of course, this person mightn't be God / a God at all, you just dont know.

Then would you join a religion?

And before anyone says "no point in answering this, it'll never happen", just muse me. I want to understand your train of thought. Go on.

No.

MagicMarker

newmug wrote: »

And just to add another thing, if it was proven that there was a place we previously understood to be the supernatural (but obviously "natural" now that it has been observed), this person who would claim to be God wouldn't nescessarily have to be like the Biblical God. He could claim to be Thor, or An Dagda. But you would still have to submit to his awesomness and worship him in order not to be set on fire for ever. Would you?

Exactly what are you trying to determine by asking such stupid ****ing questions?

If someone sticks a gun to my head and tells me to do something, then 99% of the time I'm going to do it. As would most people, your questions are pointless.

condra

I don't know why you guys are being so evasive.

The questions are so vacuous they do a great job of exposing the absurdity of religion.

He's kinda doing the opposite of John Lennon.

Imagine theres Heaven..its easy if you try.. imagine there is a Hell..and everyone afraid they'll fry...

... so it goes...

Dades

newmug - you've performed the thought experiment - now it's time for the results.

So what of it?

magicbastarder

if someone was able to prove to me that god existed, it does not mean i would have to actually like the prick.

Bannasidhe

magicbastarder wrote: »

if someone was able to prove to me that god existed, it does not mean i would have to actually like the prick.

I have a list of questions I'd quite like answers to, apart from that if a God or Gods were to exist then I will let Granny Weatherwax be my guide

“I don’t hold with paddlin’ with the occult,” said Granny firmly. “Once you start paddlin’ with the occult you start believing in spirits, and when you start believing in spirits you start believing in demons, and then before you know where you are you’re believing in gods. And then you’re in trouble.”

“But all them things exist,” said Nanny Ogg.

“That’s no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages ’em.”

bnt

Poll also needs an option along the lines of "my parents were Catholic, which therefore made me a Catholic, but then I grew up". I was taken to church, but I probably wasn't a very good Catholic - after all, what do kids really understand about anything? I made the right noises, then I stopped making them, and that was all it took. I didn't leave as a reaction to anything the Vatican or clergy did, I left because there was nothing there, and I still don't see anything there.

fitz0

newmug wrote: »

And just to add another thing, if it was proven that there was a place we previously understood to be the supernatural (but obviously "natural" now that it has been observed), this person who would claim to be God wouldn't nescessarily have to be like the Biblical God. He could claim to be Thor, or An Dagda. But you would still have to submit to his awesomness and worship him in order not to be set on fire for ever. Would you?

No. Or at least I'd like to think I wouldn't. I would place myself in the bracket of anatheism, a delightful term I heard from Scofflaw on A&A. Supplication and worship is a disgusting concept to me, especially on pain of eternal torture. Any deity that demands that is a narcissistic, megalomaniacal and that deity can f*ck right off.

Lucy8080

Corkfeen wrote: »

The options give far too much credence to the existence of a deity and even the third option seems to veer towards posters being a doubting Thomas who is simply annoyed at the church. So I suspect that's the reason why number 4 is particularly popular.

I don't doubt ya corkfeen.

Nevertheless, an option was given , and was taken.

It reminds me slightly of the census. With the roles reversed, on a very small scale to be fair .

Do we just click options because they are available!

I think we do, what ever offends us least , that's the boy for me!

Lucy8080

newmug wrote: »

Well what options would you like? And what other groups would you add? I cant see the athiestic POV, so I just thought those options covered most bases. What poll options would you put to the poll question?

What options could i add to a suppositional question?

For what it's worth, i think your "poll" highlighted that atheists can be just as irrational as they claim theists to be!