Can An Atheist Be Catholic?

[Guest]

I've been on the verge a couple times of losing faith in Catholicism/Christianity and religion in general. But if atheist means not believing in a Creator then never on the verge of becoming an atheist. When I was in these periods I just didn't go to Church and mentally tuned out all the dogma and threats of torture for eternity. There's still a lot I struggle with but I've been drawn back and here I am. I guess now I'm at a place where I believe in Catholicism and the character attributes it portrays onto God the Father. And it leaves me with a huge fear of God. Not so much that it makes me a good or decent person who does the right things but a fear of judgment. So I force myself to go to Confession and try to change because I don't want to be in torture for eternity. And I'm told God won't torture me I'll inflict it on myself. Ok whatever still want nothing to do with torture for eternity.I'm left with a lot of questions for God and sometimes feel as if he hates me. And it seems as if God is very capable of hate. Maybe it's a perfect Holy hate for things evil like myself. So if I was in your shoes I guess I would try to get some faith back and practice the faith. Because as bizarre as it is I think its all actually true. I guess the saying is correct life is stranger then fiction. Peace brother.

Edited December 31, 2014 by Guest

[Seven77]

...cannot create Faith where none exists or where it has been rejected?
...is not really all that great an example of logic?
...is necessarily unable to cope with the real difficulties presented by mutually exclusive religious beliefs?

 

 

If an atheist attempts to live as a practicing Catholic for an extended period of time, one of 2 things can be expected to occur: he or she will either start having faith or go back to being an atheist. I think it's a very simple principle based in the Gospel: “the one who seeks will find.” An atheist who tries to live as a believer will either find faith or find that he or she has no need for it.  Living as a believer is essentially a step in faith itself, it is an act of choosing not to reject the faith. I know this from personal experience.

Edited January 5, 2015 by Seven77

[Nihil Obstat]

If an atheist attempts to live as a practicing Catholic for an extended period of time, one of 2 things can be expected to occur: he or she will either start having faith or go back to being an atheist. I think it's a very simple principle based in the Gospel: “the one who seeks will find.” An atheist who tries to live as a believer will either find faith or find that he or she has no need for it.  Living as a believer is essentially a step in faith itself, it is an act of choosing not to reject the faith. I know this from personal experience.

Sure. But that is unrelated to Pascal's Wager.

 

But my point still stands that if this 'practicing Catholic atheist' receives the sacraments, he does so sacrilegiously.

[Seven77]

Sure. But that is unrelated to Pascal's Wager.

 

But my point still stands that if this 'practicing Catholic atheist' receives the sacraments, he does so sacrilegiously.

 

 Not if this person was baptized (and confirmed) and starts going to confession.

 

By the way, what exactly is pascals wager because I thought it was what I described...loosely...

Edited January 6, 2015 by Seven77

[Nihil Obstat]

 Not if this person was baptized (and confirmed) and starts going to confession.

 

By the way, what exactly is pascals wager because I thought it was what I described...loosely...

To receive the Eucharist while actually rejecting what the Church teaches, regardless of baptism or confirmation status, is a sacrilege. An atheist, regardless of his sacramental status, commits a sacrilege if he receives. Same goes for confession if he does not believe in its efficacy.

 

Pascal's wager is essentially "better safe than sorry", i.e. "we are in big trouble if it turns out God exists, so we should believe in Him just in case." It is really not a great argument at all, although it is an interesting thought experiment.

[little2add]

One only has to think of the Parable of the Good Samaritan.

 

 

Not believing in God doesn’t not necessarily preclude you From Heaven, Just as being a Catholic Just got guarantee you salvation.

 

The Parable of the Good Samaritan,

by: JC

When Jesus was teaching, they’re as a man in the crowd who was a scholar of the law. He wanted to test Jesus, so he asked, "Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"

Knowing the man's heart, Jesus answered him by challenging him in return with questions about the Scriptures. "What is written in the law? How do you read it?" The man replied, "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your being, with all your strength, and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself." Jesus nodded and said, "You have answered correctly; do this and you will live."

But the man was not satisfied. He wanted to be able to impress the crowd with his knowledge of the law and he hoped to embarrass Jesus. "And who is my neighbor?" he asked. I

nstead of answering the man directly, Jesus decided to tell a story. "A man fell victim to robbers as he went down from Jerusalem to Jericho. They stripped him and beat him and went off leaving him half-dead." Then Jesus described the actions of three men who passed the injured man. The first man was a priest. When he saw the man, he crossed the road and ignored him. The next man was a Levite. He, too, chose to cross to the other side of the road and continue on his way. But the third man was a Samaritan.

The Samaritans and the Jews have hated each other for centuries. Jesus knew the people were probably expecting the Samaritan in the story to cross the road as well. Jesus continued his story. "But a Samaritan traveler who came upon him was moved with compassion at the sight. He approached the victim, poured oil and wine over his wounds and bandaged them. Then he lifted him up on his own animal, took him to an inn and cared for him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper with the instruction, 'Take care of him. If you spend more than what I have given you, I shall repay you on my way back.'"

Then Jesus looked into the man's eyes and asked him, “Which of these three, in your opinion, was neighbor to the robbers’ victim?" The man said plainly, "The one who treated him with mercy." Then Jesus said, "Go and do likewise."

Edited January 6, 2015 by little2add

[little2add]

One only has to think of the Parable of the Good Samaritan.


Not believing in God doesn’t not necessarily preclude you From Heaven, Just as being a Catholic may not guarantee you salvation. (Fixed it)

The Parable of the Good Samaritan,
by: JC
When Jesus was teaching, they’re as a man in the crowd who was a scholar of the law. He wanted to test Jesus, so he asked, "Teacher, what must I do to inherit eternal life?"
Knowing the man's heart, Jesus answered him by challenging him in return with questions about the Scriptures. "What is written in the law? How do you read it?" The man replied, "You shall love the Lord, your God, with all your heart, with all your being, with all your strength, and with all your mind, and your neighbor as yourself." Jesus nodded and said, "You have answered correctly; do this and you will live."
But the man was not satisfied. He wanted to be able to impress the crowd with his knowledge of the law and he hoped to embarrass Jesus. "And who is my neighbor?" he asked. I
nstead of answering the man directly, Jesus decided to tell a story. "A man fell victim to robbers as he went down from Jerusalem to Jericho. They stripped him and beat him and went off leaving him half-dead." Then Jesus described the actions of three men who passed the injured man. The first man was a priest. When he saw the man, he crossed the road and ignored him. The next man was a Levite. He, too, chose to cross to the other side of the road and continue on his way. But the third man was a Samaritan.
The Samaritans and the Jews have hated each other for centuries. Jesus knew the people were probably expecting the Samaritan in the story to cross the road as well. Jesus continued his story. "But a Samaritan traveler who came upon him was moved with compassion at the sight. He approached the victim, poured oil and wine over his wounds and bandaged them. Then he lifted him up on his own animal, took him to an inn and cared for him. The next day he took out two silver coins and gave them to the innkeeper with the instruction, 'Take care of him. If you spend more than what I have given you, I shall repay you on my way back.'"
Then Jesus looked into the man's eyes and asked him, “Which of these three, in your opinion, was neighbor to the robbers’ victim?" The man said plainly, "The one who treated him with mercy." Then Jesus said, "Go and do likewise."

Edited January 6, 2015 by little2add

[Seven77]

To receive the Eucharist while actually rejecting what the Church teaches, regardless of baptism or confirmation status, is a sacrilege. An atheist, regardless of his sacramental status, commits a sacrilege if he receives. Same goes for confession if he does not believe in its efficacy.

 

Pascal's wager is essentially "better safe than sorry", i.e. "we are in big trouble if it turns out God exists, so we should believe in Him just in case." It is really not a great argument at all, although it is an interesting thought experiment.

 

 How can someone live as an actual Catholic while simultaneously rejecting what the Church teaches? Faith is manifested in the way one lives.

 

I don't get pascals wager as an argument for the existence of God (even though Pascal may have intended it to be one). To me, it is a practical exercise that only benefits the person doing it.

[Nihil Obstat]

How can someone live as an actual Catholic while simultaneously rejecting what the Church teaches? Faith is manifested in the way one lives.

But it is not confined to that. That would be Pelagianism.

[ST BERNARD]

Agree, though I wonder if the person in that case mind as well just find another religion that will admit them to full participation, give up religion altogether, or just create their own (though all of those have their drawbacks if they happen to be attached to a particular ancient religion, as a Jew or Catholic might).

 

 

You have raised a very interesting question. I know so many people in different stages of rejection of the Catholic Church and I think about things like this all the time. I have relatives who have switched to Episcopalian because they were divorced and remarried and wanted to participate fully in receiving communion. I have another relative who still considers herself Catholic and always will even though she doesn't attend Mass anymore - it is a deep, cultural connection for her, having been raised in a Catholic environment and been taught by nuns. She doesn't feel bad about her choice at all.

 

So whether a person doesn't believe any more and still goes to Mass or does believe but doesn't go to Mass - well, I don't know how to make the moral, but it does remind me of the story of the two sons - one who says 'Yes.' to his father's request but then doesn't do it and the other who says 'No.' but then does do it.

 

So a person who continues to follow the faith, even though they say 'No.' to the beliefs ... it makes me think.

 

I don't have an answer, but I like the conversation.

[Nihil Obstat]

You have raised a very interesting question. I know so many people in different stages of rejection of the Catholic Church and I think about things like this all the time. I have relatives who have switched to Episcopalian because they were divorced and remarried and wanted to participate fully in receiving communion.

Seems like they did not understand the Eucharist in the first place then, since the Episcopalian community is not a place one will find it.

[ST BERNARD]

Seems like they did not understand the Eucharist in the first place then, since the Episcopalian community is not a place one will find it.

 

 

Oh, I don't debate that at all. I am just bringing up an example of those people who leave the Church because they cannot believe the teachings anymore, as opposed to those who don't believe but still stay. It's because of the topic - can someone who doesn't believe still be Catholic. Obviously if someone doesn't believe and they leave, well, that's not so difficult to understand. Perhaps if they doubt the teachings about marriage, they also doubt the teachings about the Eucharist. Just a thought.

[Nihil Obstat]

Oh, I don't debate that at all. I am just bringing up an example of those people who leave the Church because they cannot believe the teachings anymore, as opposed to those who don't believe but still stay. It's because of the topic - can someone who doesn't believe still be Catholic. Obviously if someone doesn't believe and they leave, well, that's not so difficult to understand. Perhaps if they doubt the teachings about marriage, they also doubt the teachings about the Eucharist. Just a thought.

What about that line between doubt and actual rejection though? We have to be careful not to conflate those.

[ST BERNARD]

What about that line between doubt and actual rejection though? We have to be careful not to conflate those.

 

 

That's what makes this such an interesting conversation - all the different levels.

 

As I said before though, I don't have any answers, I am just intrigued by the topic because I know so many people who have either left the Church or don't really believe anymore but continue to attend Mass - perhaps out of fear of damnation, I don't know their hearts, just their behaviors.

 

But I am very interested to watch the debate progress.

[Nihil Obstat]

 

But I am very interested to watch the debate progress.

As far as Phatmass goes, the debate is more than likely already over. :P