Dawkins calls for 'Catholic' honesty - Polidicks

[quote]People who describe themselves as Catholic but do not accept the church’s key teachings should be “honest” and admit they no longer belong to the faith, atheist author and scientist Prof Richard Dawkins has told a Dublin audience. He said he was intrigued by this week’s Irish Times/Ipsos MRBI poll showing almost two thirds (62 per cent) of Catholics believed the bread and wine which was blessed during Mass “only represents the body and blood” of Christ. Just 26 per cent said they believed the bread and wine transformed into Christ’s body and blood in accordance with the doctrine of transubstantiation. “If they don’t believe in transubstantiation then they are not Roman Catholics,” Prof Dawkins said. “If they are honest they should say they are no longer Roman Catholics.” The survey finding “should come in for a fair degree of ridicule,” he added. “I wouldn’t hold back on the ridicule”. Prof Dawkins was speaking at a public interview in the National Concert Hall last night as part of the Dublin Writers Festival. He said he was encouraged by the growth of the atheist movement in Ireland, and a gradual shift towards “science and reason” at the expense of the Catholic Church. “The number of priests is going down beautifully,” he said. In addition, the child abuse controversy has eroded the church’s authority and the “extraordinarily ham-fisted way” the church responded “has helped”.[/quote]

I thought he was talking about honesty from the pope and such but this makes sense too.

I personally think its silly when a person of any faith claims to be of a particular faith, but doesn't follow its rules of teachings. If you don't care that much about your faith, then it obviously doesn't matter to you, and you should stop saying you are

I consider myself a progressive Christian and I believe the Vatican can go suck it (assuming that's what "the church" is in this article), and I don't believe in transubstantiation. That doesn't not make me a Roman Catholic though, because although I think Richard Dawkin's a tight guy, do things really need to be that black and white? I dunno, maybe I'm missing something Mr. Dawkin's trying to say.

[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;36256984] I dunno, maybe I'm missing something Mr. Dawkin's trying to say.[/QUOTE] he's saying don't stick up for a bad institution if you don't even believe what the institution preaches.

[QUOTE]People who describe themselves as Catholic but do not accept the church’s key teachings should be “honest” and admit they no longer belong to the faith, atheist author and scientist Prof Richard Dawkins has told a Dublin audience.[/QUOTE] so he doesn't understand one of the basic concepts of religion? that's not greatly surprising i guess

[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;36256984]I consider myself a progressive Christian and I believe the Vatican can go suck it (assuming that's what "the church" is in this article), and I don't believe in transubstantiation. That doesn't not make me a Roman Catholic though, because although I think Richard Dawkin's a tight guy, do things really need to be that black and white? I dunno, maybe I'm missing something Mr. Dawkin's trying to say.[/QUOTE] Yes that's how black and white it is, cause that is literally the defining characteristic between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism.

[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;36256984]I consider myself a progressive Christian and I believe the Vatican can go suck it (assuming that's what "the church" is in this article), and I don't believe in transubstantiation. That doesn't not make me a Roman Catholic though, because although I think Richard Dawkin's a tight guy, do things really need to be that black and white? I dunno, maybe I'm missing something Mr. Dawkin's trying to say.[/QUOTE] You can't call yourself a communist if you don't agree with it's ideals. His point is,that if you do no believe in the teachings of the bible,you're not really a Christian.

[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;36256984]I consider myself a [B]progressive Christian[/B] and I believe the Vatican can go suck it (assuming that's what "the church" is in this article), and I don't believe in transubstantiation. That doesn't not make me a Roman Catholic though, because although I think Richard Dawkin's a tight guy, do things really need to be that black and white? [/QUOTE] Oxymoron

[QUOTE=znk666;36257009]You can't call yourself a communist if you don't agree with it's ideals. His point is,that if you do no believe in the teachings of the bible,you're not really a Christian.[/QUOTE] yeah except communism, like christianity, could mean anything that centers around the idea of a classless commune. if you believe that Christ was a cool dude and follow his teachings, you're a christian. this is about Roman Catholicism, an established institution. i think you're getting confused.

[QUOTE=fritzel;36257046]Oxymoron[/QUOTE] It's not actually, otherwise there wouldn't be branches of Christianity such as protestantism.

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36257003]Yes that's how black and white it is, cause that is literally the defining characteristic between Roman Catholicism and Protestantism.[/QUOTE] you must not know a lot about Protestantism or Catholicism then.

[QUOTE=download;36256957]I personally think its silly when a person of any faith claims to be of a particular faith, but doesn't follow its rules of teachings. If you don't care that much about your faith, then it obviously doesn't matter to you, and you should stop saying you are[/QUOTE] I think for most people, they use it as a shield against ridicule. I know that I used to tell people I was Methodist to avoid them pursuing the topic any further, or if I didn't want them to know I was agnostic.

[QUOTE=znk666;36257009]You can't call yourself a communist if you don't agree with it's ideals. His point is,that if you do no believe in the teachings of the bible,you're not really a Christian.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=thisispain;36256998]he's saying don't stick up for a bad institution if you don't even believe what the institution preaches.[/QUOTE] Which one is it then? I don't follow the teachings of the Catholic Church because, putting aside the absurd amount of scandals its gotten itself into and the dumb things it says, most if not all of what it teaches are simply incompatible with the 21st century.

[QUOTE=download;36256957]I personally think its silly when a person of any faith claims to be of a particular faith, but doesn't follow its rules of teachings. If you don't care that much about your faith, then it obviously doesn't matter to you, and you should stop saying you are[/QUOTE] I like how the vast majority of "Christians" are basically atheists minus "I go to heaven when die, so I no really die" Cause half of those don't go to church, and don't do anything religious, so how are they religious?

[QUOTE=thisispain;36257066]you must not know a lot about Protestantism or Catholicism then.[/QUOTE] It is easily one of the biggest, if not biggest, idealogical difference between the two.

[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;36257072]Which one is it then? I don't follow the teachings of the Catholic Church because, putting aside the absurd amount of scandals its gotten itself into and the dumb things it says, most if not all of what it teaches are simply incompatible with the 21st century.[/QUOTE] as long as you don't do anything to hurt or hurl the country back to the middle ages, who cares? the catholic institution should be dismantled and the first step to that is for christians to realize that they don't need to be catholic in order to be christian.

[QUOTE=ewitwins;36257067]I think for most people, they use it as a shield against ridicule. I know that I used to tell people I was Methodist to avoid them pursuing the topic any further, or if I didn't want them to know I was agnostic.[/QUOTE] That's a little bit different. I'm openly atheist, but if I lived in Saudi Arabia for example, I would pretend to be whatever religion that stops be from having my head lobed off. If I lived in the Bible Belt in the US, I would also pretend, just to stop some nutty redneck from trying to kick the crap out of me

[QUOTE=The Baconator;36257084]I like how the vast majority of "Christians" are basically atheists minus "I go to heaven when die, so I no really die" Cause half of those don't go to church, and don't do anything religious, so how are they religious?[/QUOTE] so you're saying buddhism isn't a religion because they don't go to church or believe in god...

[QUOTE=thisispain;36257099]so you're saying buddhism isn't a religion because they don't go to church or believe in god...[/QUOTE] Buddhism is a spirituality.

[QUOTE=Pierrewithahat;36257087]It is easily one of the biggest, if not biggest, idealogical difference between the two.[/QUOTE] the Lutheran church also practices transubstantiation.

[QUOTE=thisispain;36257114]the Lutheran church also practices transubstantiation.[/QUOTE] My mistake I didn't realise that the Luthern Church was the only protestant denomination.

Most religious belief is more of a social point, people just say they are this or that because it would seem like a social stigma if they did not, whole families have been brought into feud or made outcasts from local communities because they've changed a religion or stopped believing altogether. Fear is the main reason people are not honest about their beliefs, even when I was younger I identified with being christian because my culture and society in general seemed to reflect it with its buildings, morals and history. We're lucky we live in a period of time in the west were you can't be burned at a stake for speaking out against a church, or admitting you do not believe in god and being stoned to death for being a infidel.

[QUOTE=znk666;36257113]Buddhism is a spirituality.[/QUOTE] k, but my dictionary says it's a religion. it's the merriam-webster's word versus znk666's.

[QUOTE=thisispain;36257132]k, but my dictionary says it's a religion. it's the merriam-webster's word versus znk666's.[/QUOTE] Well to be fair some do see it as a religion, but others also see it as a philosophy or a way of "finding reality". I honestly know little about Buddhism itself but technically he wouldn't be completely wrong.

[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;36257149]Well to be fair some do see it as a religion, but others also see it as a philosophy or a way of "finding reality". I honestly know little about Buddhism itself but technically he wouldn't be completely wrong.[/QUOTE] [quote]Religion is a collection of cultural systems, belief systems, and worldviews that relate humanity to spirituality and, sometimes, to moral values.[1] Many religions have narratives, symbols, traditions and sacred histories that are intended to give meaning to life or to explain the origin of life or the universe. They tend to derive morality, ethics, religious laws or a preferred lifestyle from their ideas about the cosmos and human nature[/quote] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion[/url] First paragraph, notice the lack of the word God or Deity.

[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;36257149]Well to be fair some do see it as a religion, but others also see it as a philosophy or a way of "finding reality". I honestly know little about Buddhism itself but technically he wouldn't be completely wrong.[/QUOTE] you could claim any religion is a spirituality.

[QUOTE=thisispain;36257184]you could claim any religion is a spirituality.[/QUOTE] Definition of religion is the belief in and worship of the supernatural,that is in control of everything. Which Buddhism in general is not.

[QUOTE=znk666;36257266]Definition of religion is the belief in and worship of the supernatural,that is in control of everything. Which Buddhism in general is not.[/QUOTE] [url]http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/religion[/url] [quote]it's the merriam-webster's word versus znk666's.[/quote] you don't get to decide the definition of religion as you see fit.

[QUOTE=LiquidNazgul;36256984]I consider myself a progressive Christian and I believe the Vatican can go suck it (assuming that's what "the church" is in this article), and I don't believe in transubstantiation. That doesn't not make me a Roman Catholic though, because although I think Richard Dawkin's a tight guy, do things really need to be that black and white? I dunno, maybe I'm missing something Mr. Dawkin's trying to say.[/QUOTE]You do realise the Vatican and transubstantiation are incredibly important to being a Roman Catholic? It's about as important to the sect as Jesus. There's plenty of far better churches to be a part of, especially for a self-proclaimed progressive Christian.