" Catholicism Is Nothing New "

[ExCorde]

With this topic I'm attempting to be serious about certain claims (which could be called prejudices) I've heard concerning the veracity of the Catholic Church as it stands against paganism. That is to say, the reasons people raise when they argue that 1) Catholicism brought nothing new as pertains to doctrine and 2) the way the Church imposed itself on others.

This sort of criticism is probably not the most common today. Nowadays there's a lot of talk about the atheist claims: those that oppose science and political "freedoms" to faith. (However, as I'm new to the Phorum, I'm not sure of the specific topics where atheism and science have already been discussed.)

But in this topic, I'd like to address issues that seem glaring not so much to the science-worshippers as to the nature-worshippers, such as the extinction of something ancient and "real" that they admire (which includes, in a broad sense, pagan religions).

As far as I understand it, there's a concern about a holistic understanding of the universe and our place in it. Interestingly enough, this also relates to science because of how receptive they are (in my experience) to various perspectives on topics, even mildly religious in nature, as long as they're not close to reminding them of anything christian.

I'm talking about the kind of "indisputable" argument (there's no question about it in their minds) that claims the Church to be a motley collection of doctrines, copying its teachings from Egypt, tales of virgin births and resurrections from several cultures, replacing pagan festivities for their own holidays, etc.

I don't have much of a clue about the facts because this sort of idea was never a problem for me. When I hear them, I know they are distorting a lot of stuff because they often take it too far and their misunderstanding of actual Catholic teaching and custom shows. Yet, I really want to know more and be articulate when it comes to make sense of the specific similarities between world religions and our faith.

However, I'd like to also discuss how the Church expanded and how it became prominent, especially in a way that answers people's suspicions about the associations it had with political power. Again, this means that something naturally good has been repressed by the heavy weight of dogma.

I sense that in the heart of it all, disguised by their unrepentant hostility, they are crying out for one thing: authenticity and real spiritual freedom. It's just that they wouldn't dare expect anything good from what they believe to be corrupted... Who can blame them? They probably witnessed the shortcomings of christians (and christian institutions) personally.

Would you happen to be literate enough on the matter to share your thoughts? Or did you ever come across a good website or book that attempts to discuss those issues?

This isn't just curiosity; it could form a tool for others who visit the Phorum and assist in the New Evangelization by letting them know why to give real importance and meaning to the Gospel (Good NEWS), by taking something new from faith in Christ that benefits every individual and the whole of society.

Many thanks for having me!

[ExCorde]

I went to recheck the Defense Directory and perhaps the best of what is shared here could be turned into an important new part of "The Church's History" under "Church Timelines" and "Development of Doctrine", with a focus not on other Christians, but the impact of the Church in a non-Christian world.

These questions come from an European, where post-Christian worldviews are becoming quite pronounced. I guess you'd like to know I'm Portuguese and live at about a 1h30 drive from Fátima. And yet here we are, having to discuss why it matters and why it's better to keep being Catholic.

[ParadiseFound]

Everything the human race has accomplished is 'new' when you look at how old the universe is. Which is pretty old (unless you're a creationist).

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='ParadiseFound' timestamp='1296594533' post='2207522']
Everything the human race has accomplished is 'new' when you look at how old the universe is. Which is pretty old (unless you're a creationist).
[/quote]
**Young earth creationist. Thanks.
All Catholics are creationists.

[ExCorde]

I agree but that avoids the subject. I'm definitely not a creationist, although I think that a concept of classic "intelligent design" (teleology or natural theology) makes sense.

It's also for that reason that I'd really like to know where all these religions and good ideas that preceded the faith fit in God's plan, and how to make Christianity "sound" fresh (like Good News should) to people today, in light of the concerns I outlined above.

[Nihil Obstat]

[quote name='ExCorde' timestamp='1296594981' post='2207527']
I agree but that avoids the subject. [b]I'm definitely not a creationist[/b], although I think that a concept of classic "intelligent design" (teleology or natural theology) makes sense.

[/quote]
All Catholics are creationists in a basic sense.

Credo in unum Deum,
Patrem omnipoténtem,
Factórem cæli et terræ,
Visibílium ómnium et invisibílium.


We believe in one God,
the Father Almighty,
Maker of heaven and earth,
and of all things visible and invisible.

Edited February 1, 2011 by Nihil Obstat

[CatherineM]

I'm sitting in my Church History class right now. Short answer, there is nothing new under the sun.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1296595877' post='2207530']
[quote name='ExCorde' timestamp='1296594981' post='2207527']
I'm definitely not a creationist, [b]although I think that a concept of classic "intelligent design"[/b]
[/quote]

All Catholics are creationists in a basic sense.

Credo in unum Deum,
Patrem omnipoténtem,
Factórem cæli et terræ,
Visibílium ómnium et invisibílium.


We believe in one God,
the Father Almighty,
Maker of heaven and earth,
and of all things visible and invisible.
[/quote]

He or she may be meaning not a 'literal creationist'. To claim to not believe in creation, but be a Catholic/Christian is illogical Gym.

[Nihil Obstat]

I see no reason to believe that God cannot use 'natural processes' (which obviously have already been created and set in place by Him), to create further. That's why I have no problem with a sort of theistic evolution either.

[Laudate_Dominum]

Evolution is [i]just[/i] a theory.

[spoiler]
[IMG]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h119/NoonienSoong_2006/phatmass/Truth_fish.jpg[/IMG]


[IMG]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h119/NoonienSoong_2006/phatmass/creearin.jpg[/IMG]

[IMG]http://i62.photobucket.com/albums/h119/NoonienSoong_2006/phatmass/Creationist_car.jpg[/IMG]


[/spoiler]

[Nihil Obstat]

[ExCorde]

I don't believe in whatever is meant by "creationism". I actually don't like the word nor what people have done with it in recent years. I find it *extremely* detrimental to a proper education. I think the concept of "intelligent design" has been hijacked by the same people to the point that even Pope Benedict XVI was confused when he used it recently. I only believe that there's a Creator, who made the heaven and the earth. And of course I have no problem with "theistic evolution" as you've put it. But I'd really appreciate it if we moved on for good from the creationism topic, which isn't what this was meant to be about...

Come on, didn't any of you have to seriously tackle this sort of issue? Atheists typically try to embarass christians in other ways but shunning the Church's history isn't that uncommon.

Let's make this about the development of beliefs which seem to be crypto or proto-catholic. I'm not sure how I could compare all pagan beliefs with the preparation God made with the hebrew people throughout the Old Covenant, for instance. What do you think?

If there's nothing new under the sun, why do we call the sacrifice and resurrection of Christ a gospel, evangelium, good news?

I came to this forum looking for a serious discussion.

Edited February 1, 2011 by ExCorde

[CatherineM]

I was being serious. In the beginning was the Word. It always was. It always will be. It was only revealed to us when we were ready to hear it, and even then, as well as today, some still weren't ready to hear.

[Mark of the Cross]

[quote name='Nihil Obstat' timestamp='1296597730' post='2207546']
I see no reason to believe that God cannot use 'natural processes' (which obviously have already been created and set in place by Him), to create further. That's why I have no problem with a sort of theistic evolution either.
[/quote]



[quote name='Laudate_Dominum' timestamp='1296598181' post='2207549']
Evolution is [i]just[/i] a theory.

[/quote]

[spoiler]
[img]http://i584.photobucket.com/albums/ss282/mho_owen/th_froggy.gif?t=1296601287[/img] Froggy was horrified at the thought that he degenerated into a human!
[/spoiler]

[tinytherese]

I remember one of my theology professors talking about the debate going on between atheists and Christians regarding creation and him saying something about "Dar Wars." My class and I really got a kick out of that.