diff options
| -rw-r--r-- | content/theses/metaphysical/religious/catholicism.md | 14 |
1 files changed, 7 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/content/theses/metaphysical/religious/catholicism.md b/content/theses/metaphysical/religious/catholicism.md index c7f0a7b..c2b35c0 100644 --- a/content/theses/metaphysical/religious/catholicism.md +++ b/content/theses/metaphysical/religious/catholicism.md @@ -10,12 +10,12 @@ After His passing, the first couple of centuries, the religion struggled to surv During the first centuries before the First Council, the Church might be thought of as being in a state of flux, however Christ, after His death, imparted the Holy Spirit to His disciples, whom He appointed His successors, through the laying of the hands, and commanded them to go into the world to proclaim His message. His disciples, having been anointed by the Holy Spirit, did go into the world, and they had disciples of their own, to whom they also imparted the Holy Spirit, by the laying of the hands, and then these disciples of the disciples were again sent into the world, and so on. This is called the *Apostolic Succession*; effectively there is a continuous, unbroken line of succession, from Jesus Christ to today. the current day. This means that there has always been a source of divine authority in Church matters, in the persons who have been anointed by the Holy Spirit, through the laying of the hands. These are the origins of the Christian Church tradition. -The two branches of Christianity, Orthodoxy and Catholicism, both claim to be part of this unbroken line of succession, and so both claim that final theological authority rests with them; Saint Peter, being one of the Twelve Disciples, founded the Church in Rome, and was its first bishop; through him the Pope, as the Bishop of Rome and Pontifex Maximus, claims his authority. However humans are fallible, and so true authority does not rest solely with the individual but with *Church Tradition*. It is Tradition that validates both the dogma, as well as the theology, and it is only through the laying of the hands, i.e. of the fact that the Church and the Tradition is tied to Christ in a direct, continuous, and unbroken line of succession, that the Church can claim it's authority[^1] [^2]. +The two branches of Christianity, Orthodoxy and Catholicism, both claim to be part of this unbroken line of succession, and so both claim that final theological authority rests with them; Saint Peter, being one of the Twelve Disciples, founded the Church in Rome, and was its first bishop; through him the Pope, as the Bishop of Rome and Pontifex Maximus, claims his authority. However humans are fallible, and so true authority does not rest solely with the individual but with *Church Tradition*. It is Tradition that validates both the dogma, as well as the theology, and it is only through the laying of the hands, i.e. of the fact that the Church and the Tradition is tied to Christ in a direct, continuous, and unbroken line of succession, that the Church can claim its authority[^1] [^2]. ## the Creed and free will The Nicean Creed, the dogma of the Orthodox Church (and it's equivalent version in Catholicism) begins with the phrase "I believe" ("Πιστέυω" in Greek, "Credo" in Latin). It is therefore a confession of faith, not a factual statement, and by this alone, there is an affirmation that humans are endowed with *free will*; the ability to choose independent of physical processes or chance. This admission of faith also leads us to what the "consequences" are for abandoning the faith. -The theological consequence of abandoning the God is that you abandon God. +The theological consequence of abandoning God, is that you abandon God. Initially this might not seem like a big issue, but because God loves us, He would never impose His will, and therefore would let us suffer the consequences of our own choices, not out of spite, or hate, but because we were the ones that made such choice in the first place. @@ -35,7 +35,7 @@ In this process, they also shifted the burden of judgement; rather than the pers This also contradicts the Creed; if you confess that "I believe [...]", and therefore set "free will is the only way that I may be with God" as the entire foundation of the faith, than how can you say that God will punish you for your choices? The Creed seems to present free will as a gift; God gave us free will so that we may choose to *join* Him. Catholicism seems to present free will as the opposite; God gave us free will to see if we would still *stay* with Him, ***or else***... ### the afterlife -This notion of external, rather than internal, judgement is exacerbated by the Catholic notions of Heaven and Hell. In Catholicism, it seems that Heaven and Hell are distinct, seperate locations, where people are sent based on the judgement of God. Worse, it seems that there are seperate levels of Heaven and Hell, and the specific levels correspond with something like a point system, or a "deeds" system, where if you commited "mostly good things", combined with "some bad things", they cancel out, so that you end up in a low level in either place, depending on which of the two outweighted the other; for context, in Orthodoxy, Heaven and Hell are the same "location", where God's full glory and magnificence is visible to all, and it is the personal reaction of the individual that dictates "where" they are. If, upon seeing God's glory, they rejoice, then they are in Heaven and the eternal sight of God's light fills them. If however, upon seeing God's perfection, they are filled with jealousy and anger, they might try to run away, but God's light is everywhere and it will burn anywhere they go, and thus they are in Hell[^7]. +This notion of external, rather than internal, judgement is exacerbated by the Catholic notions of Heaven and Hell. In Catholicism, it appears that Heaven and Hell are distinct, seperate locations, where people are sent based on the judgement of God. Worse, it seems that there are seperate levels of Heaven and Hell, and the specific levels correspond with something like a point system, or a "deeds" system, where if you commited "mostly good things", combined with "some bad things", they cancel out, so that you end up in a low level in either place, depending on which of the two outweighted the other; for context, in Orthodoxy, Heaven and Hell are the same "location", where God's full glory and magnificence is visible to all, and it is the personal reaction of the individual that dictates "where" they are. If, upon seeing God's glory, they rejoice, then they are in Heaven and the eternal sight of God's light fills them. If however, upon seeing God's perfection, they are filled with jealousy and anger, they might try to run away, but God's light is everywhere and it will burn anywhere they go, and thus they are in Hell[^7]. ### inheritance of the Original Sin Another example of the loss of mystery in Catholicism is the interpretation of the Original Sin. @@ -46,16 +46,16 @@ In Catholic theology, it is understood that you are born "in sin"; you inherit t ### the vessel of Immaculate Conception -The notion that humans inherit the *guilt* rather the consequences of the original sin, inevitably leads to what is, one of the greatest contradictions in Catholicism, and it has to do with Mary, the Theotokos. Because of the fact that all humans are sinners by birth, it poses a theological challenge to justify how Mary, being born of humans, was free of sin, in order to give birth to Jesus Christ. In order to overcome this in a legalistic and rationalistic way, the Catholic theologicians proposed the idea of "Immaculate Conception", where Mary was *designed*, by God, to be free from sin, so that she would be a vessel for Christ to be born from. This detracts from her Holiness rather than adds to it, she didn't choose to be free of sin, nor did she choose to accept the lillies; she was conceived for the explicit purpose of doing so, completely removing her free will and agency; she is not a person. +The notion that humans inherit the *guilt* rather the consequences of the original sin, inevitably leads to what is, one of the greatest contradictions in Catholicism, and it has to do with Mary, the Theotokos. Because of the fact that all humans are sinners by birth, it poses a theological challenge to justify how Mary, being born of humans, was free of sin, in order to give birth to Jesus Christ. In order to overcome this in a legalistic and rationalistic way, the Catholic theologicians proposed the idea of "Immaculate Conception", where Mary was *designed*, by God, to be free from sin, so that she would be a vessel for Christ to be born from. This detracts from her Holiness rather than adds to it; in this framework, she didn't choose to be free of sin, nor did she choose to accept the lillies; she was conceived for the explicit purpose of doing so, completely removing her free will and agency; in Catholic theology she cannot be a person. [^1]: It is for this reason that the "Protestant" branches of Christianity are not acknowledged in Orthodox Christianity. There is no Apostolic Succession; there is no divine authority to be passed on from the Apostoles to the Protestants. The Protestants, having decided that they do not recognize the Pope, moved further away from the faith, to the point where they have no claim to any connection with the Apostoles and therefore to Christ. [^2]: This is in part why the Great Schism holds to this day; the Catholics, by "updating" and changing tradition, in essence appear to, invalidate it. In effect they declare that the "old Tradition" isn't good enough, which invalidates its divine authority. [^3]: In both Greek and Latin, "I believe" is in one word (Πιστεύω/Credo). The use of first person affirms the existence of the self, and to state "I believe" is to exercise the free will and choose to believe in God. -[^4]: The Twelve Tribes are descendent from Jacob, who later took the name of Israel, and hold his twelve sons to be their patriarchs, however one of the tribes, the Tribe of Joseph, was split into the Tribe of Ephraim and the Tribe of Manasseh, after Joseph's sons, because Israel adopted them. +[^4]: The Twelve Tribes are descendants of Jacob "Israel", and hold his twelve sons to be their patriarchs, however one of the tribes, the Tribe of Joseph, was split into the Tribe of Ephraim and the Tribe of Manasseh, after Joseph's sons, because Israel adopted them. [^5]: The cessation of the tribes, doesn't mean the cessation of the individuals, or of the biological lineage. A "tribe", like any other societal structure, exists as a metaphysical construct, sustained by a communal identification. To say that the tribes ceased to exist, the implication is that the individuals stopped identifying as such, regardless of biological heritage. [^6]: A dear friend of mine suggested to me once that I should imagine myself putting my hand in a fire -- the ensuing burning and pain are not divine judgement but rather me experiencing the consequences of my own actions. [^7]: It is not necessarily a physical "burning" pain; rather it makes sense to be a "fire" of complete destruction of the ego, that the person held so high in life. -[^8]: Although it was disobidience that was the Original Sin, it was shame, not disobidience, that caused the expulsion. Had Adam and Eve repented, they would have been forgiven. Instead, ashamed, they tried to hide at first, and then they shifted the blame; Adam to Eve, and Eve to the snake, and so it is shame that makes you hide, and abandon God. By eating from the Tree of All Knowledge, they gained the knowledge of all good and evil, and realised that their action was evil, for it was disobidience towards God; this is the reason they sought to hide. They were hiding because they were afraid of judgement, and they were afraid of judgement because they were ashamed. This is a discussion for another time, but it truly feels like shame is the root of non-repentence. +[^8]: Although it was disobidience that was the Original Sin, it was shame, not disobidience, that caused the expulsion. Had Adam and Eve repented, they would have been forgiven. Instead, ashamed, they tried to hide at first, and then they shifted the blame; Adam to Eve, and Eve to the snake, and so it is shame that makes you hide, and abandon God. By eating from the Tree of All Knowledge, they gained the knowledge of all good and evil, and realised that their action was evil, for it was disobidience towards God; this is the reason they sought to hide. They were hiding because they were afraid of judgement, and they were afraid of judgement because they were ashamed. Shame makes you hide, shame undermines repentence, shame severs communion. This is a discussion for another time, but it truly feels like shame is the root of non-repentence. [^9]: In both Orthodoxy and Catholicism, baptism plays the role of cleansing from sin; however it is only in the Catholic Church that humans are born sinful. In Orthodoxy, baptism for babies plays the role of "birth" into the Church, and adoption by God and there is no notion of cleansing, as humans are considered sinless at birth. -[^10]: Part of the baptismal liturgy states; "[...] We pray for this child: set him (her) free from original sin, make him (her) a temple of your glory, and send your Holy Spirit to dwell with him (her) [...]." +[^10]: Part of the Cahtolic baptismal liturgy states; "[...] We pray for this child: set him (her) free from original sin, make him (her) a temple of your glory, and send your Holy Spirit to dwell with him (her) [...]." [^11]: The Catholic notion of inheriting the guilt once again detracts from free will; I didn't choose to sin, so how am I a sinner? |