An Invitation to Readers: Answer the Atheist

I recently received an email from Tim W., a self-proclaimed atheist. I occasionally receive letters from those who attack Christianity, particularly Catholicism and just delete them and pray for these poor souls, who are loved intensely by their Creator, but deny His existence. Tim commented to my recent post "Golden Compass: Agenda Unmasked": Catholic League's Response to Pullman's Ploy in which I share the following information: Atheist author Philip Pullman's bestselling novels for children were written specifically to indoctrinate children with atheistic values. Now New Line Cinema is using Pullman's novels to create a controversial new fantasy film, The Golden Compass.

MORE

Here is his comment:

Why is it alright for C.S. Lewis to attempt to indoctrinate children into his beliefs but not for Pullman to do the same? Quite frankly, there are many that find Catholic sensibilities far more offensive than atheistic ones. I have two small children. They have never had any religious teaching, yet are kind and caring, not because of religious indoctrination, but by following the lead of their parents; two atheists who act far better towards other people than many religious people do. In the end, it's not how religious one is, or how well indoctrinated, but how well one acts towards others. By the way, if you end up posting this message, I will be truly impressed. One of the central themes of the Golden Compass, I gather, is the effort of the Magestirium to silence dissenting views. It would be incredibly ironic if you attempted to silence mine.

WHAT IS YOUR RESPONSE TO TIM?

Comments

  1. Since no one has responded yet to your questions yet, Tim, I will.

    Jesus Christ is the Truth; Satan is the Master of Lies. Atheism is the denial of the Truth and the acceptance of Satan or the Master of Lies into one's heart and soul.

    Jesus Christ is Love and to deny Love is to accept hate and fear into your heart and soul.

    God has created each one of us in His image and our purpose here on earth is not simply to be courteous or polite or nice to one another or even to develop a good character. We were created to know, love, and serve God with all our heart, mind and soul and to love our neighbor as ourselves.

    Because you are a child of God, created in His likeness, I must obey Him and love you, too. This doesn't mean I have to agree with you nor do I need to have you or anyone else for that matter to force your untrue and deceptive beliefs on me or my children.

    And, that's why I am taking the time to explain the Truth to you, Tim.

    You seem like an intelligent person, Tim, but it takes more than intelligence to understand and accept God into your heart. It takes faith and it takes humility, and I pray that God will bless with these virtues and continue to draw you closer to him. The more we realize that we are not "God" and in control of everything in our lives, the more open we become to letting Him enter. The more we decrease, the more He will increase in our lives.

    If you never remember anything I have said here, remember this one thing when you are hurting, in pain, or having difficulties and feel that you are at rock bottom in your life: God loves you unconditionally, no matter how poorly you treat Him or how much you deny Him. He gave His life for you.

    I'll stop there and leave something for others to say.

    Even if you don't return to read this, know that I am praying for you.

    As far as the Magestirium of the Catholic Church is concerned, I am very happy to be a Catholic who is very grateful for their role in the Church.

    You seem to be confused about what the Magestirium of the Church is and that is understandable if you have read these deceptive and confusing books.

    By the Magisterium we mean the teaching office of the Church. It consists of the Pope and Bishops. Christ promised to protect the teaching of the Church : "He who hears you, hears me; he who rejects your rejects me, he who rejects me, rejects Him who sent me" (Luke 10. 16). Now of course the promise of Christ cannot fail: hence when the Church presents some doctrine as definitive or final, it comes under this protection, it cannot be in error; in other words, it is infallible.

    If you want to learn more about the faith so that you can discuss it or argue more effectively with Catholics, I suggest you purchase a Catholic Catechism, which you can find at any Catholic bookstore or find online.

    Here are some other sites online that will give you more information about what Catholics really believe:

    Catholic Answers: http://www.catholic.com/

    Catechism of the Catholic Church http://www.christusrex.org/www1/CDHN/ccc.html

    God bless you!

    God loves you and so do I!

    ReplyDelete
  2. To Jean: You go, girl, for accepting the challenge and posting Tim's message.

    To Tim: I do believe you, that you and your wife are kind and caring, and your children also; and that's wonderful! I would probably enjoy knowing you, meeting you at a party, having your for a neighbor.

    I think of an old Peanuts cartoon where it's snowing and Lucy says the snow is coming up from the ground. Of course we know the snow falls down from the sky, but that doesn't change her thinking nor does her thinking change where the snow comes from. Your ability to be kind comes, ultimately, from somewhere...or rather Someone. You choose to spread kindness, and for that you are to be very highly commended. Some of us, sometimes, make the wrong choices about how we treat others, and when we do, we may have some responsibility for not encouraging others to recognize the Source of all good.

    Keep making beautiful snowmen of kindness with your wife and children. And I pray that some day you and they will look up and see the snow falling to the ground and praise God for all His gifts.

    ReplyDelete
  3. People are free to say whatever they want. He can make his movie.

    I object to someone being deceitful and luring the innocent. The CS Lewis Chronicles are well known as Christian.

    The Golden Compass is less well known. Therefore, those of us of faith have a duty to educate the faithful. More than that, we have a right to say that it is wrong and promotes a wrong way of thinking. That is OUR right.

    Mr or Ms Athiest, you aren't suggesting that we do not have a right to express our opinions, do you?

    ReplyDelete
  4. God will not violate His gift of a free will to each of us. He will not force us to love Him or to do His will.

    As a result, God does not send us to hell, but this is a choice each of us makes. When we reject God, we are choosing hell and eternal punishment.

    It has been said the devils greatest lie is that he (the devil) doesn't exist. Jesus has said "the devil is a liar and murder from the beginning."

    ReplyDelete
  5. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Tim,

    I just want you to know that I'm praying for you. I know that God is blessing you and opening up the door of His heart to you.

    Your comment was a step in that direction.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Margaret,

    The snow coming up from the ground can be proven wrong, so we know it is not true. To me, it is you who see the snow falling up. Perhaps one day YOU might realize that if you look hard enough, it isn't.

    As for saying that my kindness has to come from somewhere, my question to you is why does it have to be a god? Being kind, or the desire to do so, comes from my brain. And no, god didn't put it there. Evolution put it there. And intelligence. It's in societies best interests to be kind to one another in order for society to continue. And it is pretty apparent to me that you create the world you live in. Kindness creates kindness.

    Rob,

    You are free to express your opinions as much as the next person. As long as your opinions don't infringe on others. Telling others NOT to see the movie is attempting to censor it. VERY dangerous. And very un-Christian.

    As for the themes and morals of the Narnia books and Golden Compass, I had no idea when I read the Narnia books in school that they had Christian themes. It wasn't until the movie came out that I heard this. I read the book in school! Talk about luring the innocent! How would you feel if I lobbied to get the Narnia books banned from the educational system?

    Bill,

    Let me ask you some questions.

    Is God all knowing? In other words, does he know everything that has happened and will happen? Well, everything I have been told about the Judaeo-Christian god says yes.

    Did god create free will? As you say, yes he did. In other words, it is our choice to do something (like go to hell, as per your example).

    Did god create Hitler? Obviously the answer would be yes, but that it was Hitler's free will that caused him to commit those heinous acts.

    Here's my problem. If god is all knowing, then he would have KNOWN that Hitler would have done those heinous acts even before he created him, but created him anyway. God KNEW what the future would be, even if it was Hitler's choice to do it.

    In other words, either god is NOT all knowing, or is not good, since a good god would not have created Hitler knowing that he would have committed the acts that he did. Which is it?

    Perhaps the greatest trick the devil ever played was convincing the world that he was god!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Dear Tim,

    First let me say that judging from your letter, you seem to me a sincere and thoughtful person. We all do our best, in raising our children, to give them what we feel is of most value and I see that you are trying to do the same with your own. However, I think you misunderstand the problem Catholics are seeking to address. I will try to be brief. C.S. Lewis wrote his stories very naturally from a Christian world view, which neither attacked nor demeaned other faiths. His purpose was, overwhelmingly, to entertain, not to indoctrinate. If you have read The Chronicles of Narnia (which were originally written for his nieces and nephews) you will see that this is true. However Christ-like the figure of Aslan the lion is, he never quotes anything like scripture, nor does he require church attendance, sacramental life or other trappings of religion itself. He is wise, moral and willing to die to save others. His enemies are those who would limit personal freedom and exploit the environment. There is nothing in The Chronicles of Narnia which would tempt your children to religion; only to heroism, integrity and, very likely, imaginative play. The same cannot be said of Pullman's stories, which actually do target and attack a particular viewpoint; that of Roman Catholicism. He has been quite explicit about his agenda, which seeks to turn children and teens away from religion -- mine and my children's in particular. You can see why that might concern me. However, the principle problem that Catholics are concerned with is not Pullman's works, nor his personal agenda, but the sneaky way in which New Line Cinema and Scholastic Entertainment are presenting the first story in his Dark Materials trilogy (The Golden Compass); in a sugar-coated, watered-down version which, we have been assured, will not offend us. Yet Pullman's books are being aggressively marketed in conjunction with the anticipated release of the film to an unsuspecting public. The Christmas book sales connected with the hoped-for success of the film are part and parcel of the package that is being sold, here. The result, for the unsuspecting public, might be that they purchase the books on the basis of the misleading film and inadvertently hand their own children books which will denigrate their family's cherished beliefs. Now, if Aslan's death and resurrection had been edited out of the film and on that basis you bought the books for your atheist children, would you feel tricked and deceived to find them reading such things written by a charming and persuasive author? This is an issue of integrity (false advertising), as well as one of anti-religious bigotry. I'd like to point out, additionally, that some of the very worst behavior in human history has been committed by famous atheists who distrusted and sought to eradicate religion; Hitler and Mao come to mind, but you get the idea. Enough said, for now! I hope you won't mind if I hold you and your family in prayer! God bless you with His abundant love and peace. Lisa Mladinich

    ReplyDelete
  9. Tim

    I was raised in a non Christian home, we never discussed religion. I was brought up by very loving parents, they taught me to give my seat to the elderly, the disabled, women who were pregnant. I was raised to be polite, most especially towards those who were more mature. It was drilled into me to say please and thankyou at the appropriate times. Even though I was polite and pleasant, I was not Saved. Being nice to everyone is not what Christianity is about.

    What makes a Christian 'Christian'? It is standing up in the midst of a crowd and say 'I believe in one God, the Triune Spirit' while the world will scoff and call you a fool. It means standing on God's Truth even if you stand alone, the Martyrs did just that. I would prefer to die a fool for God than to be a living athiest and that IS the difference. An athiest will not die so you can live but many Catholics/Christians did just that. St. Maximilian Kolbe sacrificed his life for another, why didnt the athiests step forward? The man who the Nazi's chose to kill, had a family where was the kindness, the sacrifice of the athiests? Blessed Mary Restituta Kafka chose death by be-heading rather than deny her Faith, she was a simple Nun why did the athiestic Nazi's kill a simple Nun for a belief system that supposedly is foolish? We also see in the Ten Boom family where they put their beliefs above their own safety, why? Did they sacrifice themselves for a mere 'theory'?

    You bring up evolution but how did evolution create both good and evil? Even a logical mind recognises that both good and evil must have a source. What is that source? It is also logical that good and evil cannot co-exist therefore there must be two seperate sources for both of them. Are there two evolutionary theories? One that evolved good people and another that evolved evil? How can this be?

    As for intelligence, Ted Bundy was very intelligent, what is the difference between Ted Bundy and other people? He had intellect, he had charm and yet with all that intelligence he chose to do evil. Surely his intelligence should have told him that murdering others was wrong? Why didnt it? It is the same with many despotic leaders. Why did Hitler choose to do evil, he was also very intelligent, he was also charismatic. Surely his intelligence should have told him what was wrong and what was right. Why didnt it?

    If good and evil DO co-exist then why wouldn't Hitler free the prisoners from Auschwitz oneday and then the next day decide to exterminate the prisoners in Treblinka? You, see if good and evil DO co-exist beside one another then Hitler should have done just that.

    I think people become confused with the word 'freedom'. Freedom does not mean you can do exactly what you want when you want, that's called destruction.

    Freedom is too choose to love God and follow His Commandments through the Teachings of the Church.We also have the freedom not to obey God or the Church. But in both choices we bear the consquences of our free choices.

    It is sin that enchains people and strips them of their self worth and Nobility. What was Satans words, 'I do not serve'.

    Through the Church & The Sacraments we are free. Through our sin we are imprisoned but not forever if we repent. Now THAT is Freedom.

    Tim, you are a unique person, there is noone else in this planet who is another you. Why is this so? If we are all just put together from 'evolution' then why are we all different? Should we not all come from some type of assembly line where we all think and behave exactly the same? Why are we different and who makes us unique? Are we so different because of a 'theory'?

    If we come from Apes then why haven't the Apes become extinct? Or is it a case that yesterday's Ape will be tomorrow's human? That also defies logic. How did Apes somehow 'morph' into intelligent unique, individual human beings?

    Remember what I said above. Good and evil cannot co-exist, it is totally illogical therefore if you say that the devil is 'god'...then who is the source of good? And who is the source of evil? There MUST be two, that IS logical.

    Are all Christians good and noble people? Unfortunately not, we are frail human beings who at times fall into temptation. We are not perfect, we are very imperfect therefore can we save ourselves? No! Only God can save us from ourselves. What and Who is the Source of Love for it did not come about because a few dust particles were roaming around in the cosmo's.

    In finishing, on a wall in one of Hitlers concentration camps a prisoner had scrawled the words, 'where was God?' Underneath another prisoner wrote, 'where was man?'

    In peace

    Marie

    ReplyDelete
  10. Dear Tim,
    You obviously have no idea about Catholic teaching or doctrine. Do you understand that the word Magesterium means the teaching authority of the Church. It is not the popes or bishops. The other glaring error is that the 'Magestirium' (I can only guess you mean, in error-priests, bishops, the pope) tries to silence dissenting views. No one is trying to silence anything. Giving Catholic faithful a heads up about the atheist content of a film, based on a children's book they may not have read is loving and responsible thing to do for your fellow Christians. The parents have an ABSOLUTE RIGHT to know the content ahead of time. One example of this--I took my two older sons (13 and 11) to see 'Transformers, the movie'. I was not warned about the 3 minutes of banter about teen masterbation. I would NEVER have taken my sons to see the movie if I had known. Why does Hollywood want to indoctrinate children into the filth of their world? They want people to be anesthetized to their immorality so they can carry on however they see fit and we won't bat an eye at their immoral lives. Atheism, in and of itself, does not offer a moral compass to children. If you what to carry on your life with blinders on, that is your privelege. If you think your atheism is not a religion--you are truly blind. If I want to give mine the rich heritage of my Church, a moral upbringing, and all the wonder that is God's love, why should that bother you? I NEVER push my religion on anyone. Why do you push yours?

    ReplyDelete
  11. I don't think Jean has ever stated that people should NOT see the movie. She was merely passing along information. This is an obvious Catholic site and it was information relevant to our shared faith, information that I appreciate.

    It's only an opinion, and she is certainly not in a position to enforce her will on anyone. People are free to find their own information...it's only a Google search away. And it is one's own responsibility to do research and find their own information.

    The post may contain a strong opinion, and the tone and content may not be to everyone's liking, but it is still an opinion, a decidely Catholic opinion. We certainly can boycott the movie and the book, state the reasons why, and voice our feelings. We can also speak up in protest if we feel a movie or a film is bigoted.

    I don't think her opinions will incite the government or the Pope to censor the book or film. And if this
    were to happen, people can attempt to remedy the situation via the courts, political action groups or the legislature. In otherwords, it isn't our way as American people to stay silent for the good of the collective. We speak up, we hammer it out.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Oops, I meant to quote you before posting. The above is in reference to:

    "Telling others NOT to see the movie is attempting to censor it. VERY dangerous."

    ReplyDelete
  13. Tim, I respect your views. I used to want to convert the world but have come to realise that it is MY relationship in God that is important before taking responsibility for everyone else's. I am neither right nor wrong but I love God by FAITH. I have no clever words of proof, I have no way of convincing an unbeliever like yourself, but having once been an unbeliever all I can say is that ther is absolutely no comparison to the peace and security of knowing Christ Jesus, my Lord and Saviour.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Tim, I'm interested in what you would think if another atheist had an entirely different opinion to yours, one that included, for example, the decided view that all children of fathers named Tim should be locked up on an island somewhere.

    And what would happen if the vast majority of the populace was atheist and held to that view?

    What would your objections be based on, and why?

    Libbie

    ReplyDelete
  15. Peter Kreeft, the philosopher, brings solid arguments about the existence of God on his site: http://www.peterkreeft.com/
    featured-writing.htm

    I invite Tim to explore the site and meditate a bit about the material there.

    Tim, God is not a huge bright-red bird whose eventual presence nobody could deny.:-).Thus, you are free to choose: believe or not...

    One more thing: strict scientifically one cannot really prove the evolution. Simply because no one is able to design an experiment for this purpose. One can bring arguments, yes, but not proofs.
    :-)

    ReplyDelete
  16. Tim, I will do my best to meet you directly where you were in questioning the validity of Christian ‘indoctrination’ against the far ‘less religious’ atheism.

    As usual, language is preventing a clear understanding of the problem. It would be very consistent with your ‘If C.S. Lewis, then why not Pullman?’ comment for you to also adopt the word ‘indoctrination’ for what atheists do through the omission of ‘religious’ teaching. Given this, you would not wield the word so much as a connotative weapon. If you see your example to your children as much different in function than a Catholic’s example to their own children, you are operating under the illusion of a double standard and have no logical basis from which to even ask the question. If we are both involved in thorough transmission of values, let us both admit to it.

    If you suggest that there is in our world ‘religious’ teaching which does not account for or emphasize caring and kindness, then you are absolutely correct. As a devout Catholic, I abhor this kind of ‘indoctrination’... but I do so precisely because it rejects the thing that it set out to do. If you suggest that the Catholic faith promotes, by its essence, such inadequate teaching, you are absolutely incorrect. Followed closely and accurately, God-centred teachings result in caring and kindness that equals and often surpasses any amount of charity that is possible in what we would call a secular context. We could do battle all day long with examples, but we can never deny that humans have always and will always respond more responsibly to a person (God or His Church insisting on ideals) than to a concept (ideals existing without personal authority or witness).

    “In the end”, as you say, I must insist that it does matter how ‘religious’ you are. If your children take example well at a young age and then in their teen years or early adulthood lose ‘faith’ in your well taught kindness...it is because they are not ‘religiously’ devoted to what you have modeled for them any longer. What I am trying to say is that these terms that you have so carelessly thrown around are already (without the personal god part) held precious by you and your family. The fact that people have enormous difficulty adhering to their ideals is one of the reasons organized religion exists at all.

    Back to C.S. - Lewis invited youth towards the notion of Christianity by illustrating the importance of the concepts underlying the faith. He felt that there was enough sound logic behind the idea of God and faith, that these ideas could be introduced even without direct reference to their Creator as He is commonly recognized. If an atheistic book thinks that the underlying principals of dismissing the existence of God have enough sense in them to be promoted for the well being of others, then perhaps it is quite right for it to be tolerated by the faithful. If, on the other hand, there is some political grievance being propagated (and sadly, there typically is) against organized religion, then the author should take his grievance elsewhere and not burden children with it.

    Catholics do not teach their children faith because they are frustrated with atheism. They do it because it makes sense to after all things are considered. And I do mean “all” things...not just how we act towards each other.

    ReplyDelete
  17. Tim,

    You mention Hitler's action in your comment to me. Yes, God is All Knowing and He knew what would happen. I also want to use a comment by Maria, that good and evil cannot co-exist, and this is true. At the beginning of time, when satan rejected God (I will not serve), there was a great war in Heaven, and St. Michael and the other Angles with the power of God, threw the rebellious angles out of Heaven. Where did they go? You guessed it.

    But I see more evil in the world today than just Hitler, and I'm only talking about the USA. Do you know that Planned Parenthood is responsible for mor people being killed than Hitler and Stalin combined? God knows there is evil in this world, and He is giving us (christans) a free will to see what we will do, if we are Worthy of Him. This world is only here for a short time, (life is short, eternity is forever) then there will be Heaven or hell. The choice in my mind is simple. I am far from perfect, but God is a loving God, full of mercy and kindness. In Him my hope rests.

    ReplyDelete
  18. I have been thinking about this question since I read it yesterday, and I think I'm ready to answer Tim's concerns a bit. (I admit, though, that I doubt I'll add much to the conversation as the answers already here are excellent!)

    Tim, you are correct in saying that you have a right to not expose your children to C.S. Lewis if you fear they will believe in God after reading them. As their father, you have every right to limit their exposure to ideas you deem harmful. I do admit, though, that I don't see much harm in the Narnia books, even if they are pretty obviously Christian. The underlying morals of the books focus on the underlying morals of Christianity: self-sacrifice, love,honor, faithfulness. But, again, you have the right to ban those books from your house. In the same way, I have a right to do the same, and just as you might warn other atheist parents of the Christian undertones of Lewis' work, I also have the right (responsibility, really) to warn Christian parents of the very anti-Catholic undertones in the Pullman books. He is quite blatant in saying that his mission with these books was to be an anti-Lewis/anti-Narnia. He wants to expose children to atheist thinking. If that is his goal, fine. I'm glad he said so. I will personally prevent my children from reading those books, especially in their formative years. My Faith teaches me that I am responsible for the souls of my children; I am responsible for helping them to get to Heaven. If I allow such materials to be read in my house (or watched, in the case of movies), then I am disobeying God by exposing my children to it. It's difficult to explain if you don't have the same background, but I hope I am clear about it.

    Now, as far as the charge of us protesting the movie and encouraging Christians to boycott it: this is not censorship. Our boycott is not preventing the movie from being made or released. It will likely hurt the bottom line, but I can't feel badly about that. More important to most Christian parents would be their children's souls. This movie is being packaged as a Narnia-like adventure, or a Lord of the Rings-like adventure. Both of these works are spiritually beneficial (both about loyalty, faith, bravery, etc., without undermining Christian beliefs). Pullman's work might also be about these general themes of bravery and loyalty, but he is also working to undermine Christian teachings at the same time, especially Catholicism when you consider the "evil Magesterium." My nine-year-old would know what he was talking about there! The movie will still come out. Many parents will bring their kids to it, and it will probably make a lot of money. However, I would be remiss if I didn't warn parents who take their faith as seriously as I take mine about the anti-Christian/anti-Catholic themes of this series. I am not censoring Pullman - I don't have the power to do so - but I am taking responsibility to help inform parents who wouldn't appreciate their children being lured away from their faith!

    In short, no one should be indoctrinated in a negative sense. The Catholic Church is completely against forcing conversions (and has always been so). Faith cannot be forced on anyone, and despite the actions of a few in contrast to that idea, the Church has always left the decision to be a Christian or not in the hands of the (potential) believer. You, as an atheist, have every right to warn people of the Christianity within the Narnia books, and I, as a Christian, have every right to warn people of the atheism in the Pullman books.

    I hope I haven't rambled too much without being clear. I'll definitely check back in case I need to clarify anything I said.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Hello all - just a quickie for any atheists out there - if you're so adamant there is no God (there will be no devil either, in that case), you really have nothing to lose, as when you die, that's it.
    But if it's true, and God exists afterall, you'll find out then. I only know of one man who ever came back and it wasn't Houdini. If it makes you think more about your choices in life and ultimately responsible to someone other than yourself, how lucky when you choose the better.
    P&B
    _arnie

    ReplyDelete
  20. Wow, lots of posts to respond to....

    Lisa,

    My first attempt to respond to your post caused a network server error that ended up losing it, so this is my second attempt.

    Now I am at a little bit of a disadvantage because I have not read the Golden Compass. I'm assuming you have read it, so I am hoping you could detail what exactly Pullman does to attack Christianity. I did a little research, and was surprised by the fact that there are several notable Christians who have come to the defense of Pullman, including the Archbishop of Canterbury who "argues that Pullman's attacks are focused on the constraints and dangers of dogmatism and the use of religion to oppress, not on Christianity itself." He even feels that the books should be part of religious education in schools. I posted a VERY long comment that Jean did not post (it was a little off topic for most of it), where I talked about how I thought the current church was completely unlike what Jesus had intended. Jesus, himself, had a problem with constraints and dangers of dogmatism and the use of religion to oppress. Should Pullman be vilified for the same thing? At worst, I think the Golden Compass can be looked at as an opposing view that should be at least looked at and discussed in order t expand one's mind. Do you really want to live in a world where the books and media ONLY have one viewpoint? I would think it would be important for parents to be able to discuss the themes in the book. The only thing more dangerous than allowing your child to read books like this would be to prevent your child from reading books like this.

    Now as for the Chronicles of Narnia, it has been a LONG time since I read the books, so, again, I am at a slight disadvantage, but I did read that Pullman accused C.S. Lewis of being "blatantly racist" and the "monumentally disparaging of women." Unfortunately I have no examples of that, but I do remember the main villain, in the first book at least, was a witch. You say that the Chronicles of Narnia didn't attack other religions, but Wicca is one of the fastest growing religions in North America, and I would say that it attacks their religion. The vilification of witches, many believe, was simply an effort to take power away from women. The church did not want women to have power (since the church had a rather misogynist view of them), and denouncing a woman as a witch was an easy way to be able to silence a women they felt had undue influence.

    As for your last comment about atheists being responsible for many of histories atrocities, I can assure you that religion and nationalism (which can be almost a religion unto itself) has caused far more deaths than atheism. And it's a common misconception that Hitler was an atheist. He was absolutely not. He was a Catholic, first and foremost, but also dabbled in the occult. The premise of the movie Raiders of the Lost Ark is actually true. Hitler was obsessed about anything religious, because he DID believe in God and felt that he was doing Gods bidding. One of the reasons why he hated Jews was because he felt they were responsible for Jesus' death.

    Marie,

    I understand what it means to be Christian, even though I am not one myself, but the it's that I actually agree with the basic beliefs of Christianity, although not the secular elements. I also am somewhat offended by your claim that an atheist would not sacrifice oneself for the sake of others. An Atheist would not sacrifice themselves for a religion, which is what many Catholics have done, but there have been many that have done it to save others. I would sacrifice myself in a second if it meant saving the lives of my family. There was actually an incident recently where I was walking down the main street with my two young children when I heard, what I thought was, a gunshot. Without a moments thought, I stepped in front of my children to shield them from any bullets. It ended up being a firecracker, but it was a very strange feeling to realize that I was ready to die for my children. Now would I sacrifice myself for ten strangers? I think so. But not because there will be a god waiting for me, or heaven, but because I feel it's the right thing to do. What if someone had a chance to save my children? I think there is a misconception that atheists are, at their core, selfish, because they have no higher being to answer to. It's actually the opposite. Because we have no higher being to answer to, when we do good, it is not because our religion or our god dictates it, but because we feel it is the right thing to due. Is it more altruistic to do good when you feel there will be a reward, or when you feel there won't be?

    Now you mention good and evil. I actually don't believe in evil, as that would mean I would believe in a higher power, which I do not. I think there are thing that are beneficial to society and things that are not. Someone lie Ted Bundy was not inherently evil, but sick. He was psychopathic and that's what caused him to commit those heinous acts. His brain didn't work correctly. The devil didn't cause him to do it, his brain caused him to commit completely anti-social behaviour. Intelligence only tells you right from wrong when your brain is working correctly.

    As for evolution, you don't seem to understand some of the basics. We did not evolve from apes, but we have the same ancestors. We evolved into humans and apes evolved into apes. Over the millions of years, our brains became more and more intelligent. We've seen evolution just in the last few thousand years as humans have gotten bigger and smarter. We used to have a tail, but don't anymore. Our appendix has not much use anymore, but it did. at one time.

    Cathmom5,

    No, I don't have much of an idea of Catholic doctrine or teaching. I was baptized Anglican. And the Magisterium I was referring to in my original post was the one from the book.

    As for your story about taking your sons to see Transformers, I find it hard to believe that after watching the Transformers, the thing that offended you most was the short riff on masturbation. Depending on the age of your boys, it either went completely over their head, or it's nothing new to them. You didn't seem to be offended by the violence, the fact that the movie is one long commercial for a toy, or the fact that the movie was an assault on your senses. It brings to mind the ridiculous controversy over Janet Jackson at the Superbowl. During an event as commercialized as the Superbowl, where there is as much violence on the field as there is, and the only women on the field are basically sex objects, that a flash of a nipple gets people offended. I think people are getting hung up on the wrong things, here.

    Alexandra,

    I have no problem with anyone deciding not to see a movie or read a book, but I do have a problem with telling others to do it, even if it is not overt. The church doesn't have to ban the book (which they have no power to do, anyway, but if the church condemns the book and warns parents not to allow their children to read it, then that's censorship, which is decidedly UN-American.

    Libbie,

    I don't quite understand your comment. If anyone, whether religious or not, decided to lock up my children for no good reason, I would have a problem with it. Why? Because it is unfair and unwarranted punishment. I think the reasons would be obvious.

    Paula,

    I will look at Peter's site, but I assure you, I have read things very much like what is on the site. I assure you, I am not in need of being saved, nor am I searching for answers that science is not giving me. I have about as much chance of converting as you do. As for evolution, you are right to say it can't be scientifically proven, but that is misleading. There is overwhelming evidence (completely overwhelming) to support evolution. The gaps that creationists like to point out are not weaknesses in the theory. Let me give you an example. You find a trail of paint from the cupboard to your child, who is covered in paint, there is no proof that your child got the paint from the cupboard (no video surveillance) but the evidence is overwhelming. It could be that the paint floated from the cupboard and dumped on your child, but that is not very likely, now, is it?

    James,

    My problem with your post is that the children reading the books are, most likely, at least ten years old. While impressionable, I think they should be reading books that bring up ideas and themes, even if they are in opposition to what they or their parents believe. It promotes thinking and discussion. Literature, except for very small children, SHOULD make the people question things. And just to turn things around a little. Children being taught religious principles, ARE being taught anti-atheist principles such as the fact that you believe in a god. I have not taught my children anti-religious doctrine.

    Bill,

    My question to you, though, is wouldn't have God foreseen the devil rejecting him even before he created him? If God is all knowing, then he would have KNOWN that the devil would reject him, thus causing all the havoc that you say he has caused. Isn't it God's fault for creating something that he know would be evil? Yes, you say that people have free will, but it goes back to God being all knowing. He would KNOW what we will do with our free will, otherwise he is not all knowing. Which is it?

    Christine,

    As I have previously said, I have no intention of banning ANY book from my house. I would even encourage my children to bring in books that have themes I disagree with because I trust they are intelligent enough to be able to discuss the themes or think about them and reach their own conclusions. I get the feeling that most people who are bashing Pullman and the books have never even read them. I believe that is incredibly dangerous. I also think that people seem to be misconstruing things. Pullman has NEVER said that his books are the anti-theis of the Chronicles of Narnia. Not once. People who are telling you that are lying or have been told incorrect information. This is exactly the problem I have. People are being told things that are not true and taking them at face value. This is exactly why people should discover for themselves, as I think you should.

    Censoring is not banning something, but of trying to tell others from seeing it. And, as we have seen in my above paragraph, that can be dangerous, because it means that people aren't getting all the information.

    Arnie,

    YOU believe that Jesus came back. I don't. And I would rather not go through life worshipping something I don't believe exists. I don't think I have anything to lose, because if there is a god, then it will see I am a good person despite me not believing in it. If it rejects me simply because I didn't believe in it, even though I am a good person, then I wouldn't want anything to do with a selfish god like that, anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  21. My point, Tim, is that you have no self-evident reason for declaring anything good or bad. You are borrowing terms from a theist worldview.
    If the majority of people have a certain view of what is good and what is not, and it conflicts with your own, and you are all just meaningless evolutionary accidents, you have no self-evident standard to point to.

    To use an obvious example - the Catholic Church holds that life begins at conception, and therefore abortion is evil, because it is murder.
    Pro-abortion people believe it is a right that women have. Some even believe it is right to exterminate handicapped children at birth. The Catholic church has a standard it can point to, what it believes to be a God-given mandate against murder.

    You may agree with abortion, you may not. But your standard for doing so, and at the same time presumably not agreeing with other forms of child murder, is as arbitrary as the fictional atheist majority with something against the name Tim.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Libbie,

    Actually, the theist world has borrowed from the non-secular world. Societies existed before religion. You can look at the animal world. There are rules, or things that are considered good and bad, in animal societies. They come into being because of what is good for society and bad for society. Murder is bad for society. I think it is obvious why. Do I need a religion to tell me it's bad to lie to my wife? No. Simple logic and intelligence can deduct that by lying, I would bring deception into the relationship, which would cause problems.

    I think that it is rather repugnant that a religion has to tell someone what is right and wrong, rather than have them figure it out themselves.

    As for abortion, I am not PRO-abortion, but I do not believe that it should be outlawed. This is a much broader discussion, but suffice is to say that I have not reached that decision arbitrarily.

    I get the feeling that you have a lot of misconceptions about atheism. It is actually not a religion, but a lack of one. There is no common belief system, other than there is no god. That's it. I may disagree with other atheists about everything other than our belief that there is no god. Some atheists may not believe in god for scientific reasons, others may have other reasons.

    Why do so many so-called Christians believe in capital punishment? Would Jesus have been pro-capital punishment? Would Jesus believe in the right to bear arms? Or believe in capitalism? Or consumerism?

    A lot of the things which Christians say is good and bad is fairly arbitrary. Catholics don't believe in contraception because a Pope was declared it was forbidden. Sounds pretty arbitrary to me.

    If a society existed that never had any religion or belief in a higher being, their understanding of what is good and what is bad would probably be pretty similar to my own. Why? Because they are logical beliefs that benefit the greater good (society as a whole).

    ReplyDelete
  23. I just want to say that I applaud what Jean is doing. I may disagree with many of her beliefs, but she is allowing open discussion about subjects and themes which she, and others, may not agree with. This is healthy for society. There have been a few of my comments which I was afraid may offend her, which would stop her from posting them on her site (which is her right). She has posted all but one of my comments (my first response to her which, as I said, was a VERY long post about things which mostly were off topic) exactly as I have written them.

    This is exactly why I don't like others preventing, or pressuring, people from reading books like Pullman's book. Even children. If they are old enough to read the books, I think they are old enough to be able to discuss it intelligently.

    ReplyDelete
  24. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  25. "Because they are logical beliefs that benefit the greater good (society as a whole)."

    "Religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection."

    ~ Watts v. Florida International University, 11th Cir., No. 05-13852, Aug. 17, 2007.

    We don't need to be logical. ;)

    ReplyDelete
  26. Tim:)

    I apologise for my statement in questioning an athiests bravey. Thankyou for that, I was wrong.

    You didnt answer some of my other questions though. You state that you dont believe in evil, yet describe Hitler as 'heinous', isnt that simply another term for evil? As for Ted Bundy being 'sick' if you truly believe that then we must empty our prison cells for it is inhumane to incarcerate a person who is sick and not responsible or accountable for his/her actions. If evil truly does NOT exist, then empty your prisons. This means releasing pedophiles, they must be sick too, psychopaths and murderers, they are simply sick. By your theory most of the world is suffering from severe sickness.

    To take it a step further. If every evil act is seen as a 'sickness' then noone should be held reponsible for their 'heinous' acts nor are they accountable. It's not their fault, they are 'sick'.

    This to me, is illogical. Even a simple soul like myself understands that both good and evil exist which then leads one to go further and say if good and evil exist then there MUST be a source. What is that source? Logic also tells me that good and evil simply cannot co-exist one will eventually overcome the other and nullify it. Therefore we are left to conclude that there is good and evil. Can you describe a 'heinous' act as good if you do not believe in evil?

    We have seen in our century where athiests have been able to rule within their own countries and other countries(thru invasion) Hitler was an athiest. Can anyone describe him as a good leader? Look at what he achieved, in a time of massive unemployment through the depression he got Germany in full employment. He also murdered over 6 million Jews and other people who opposed him. That is atheism at work. Lenin and Stalin murdered more people than Hitler, they were both athiests. Did athiesm improve the lot of the Russian people, once God was removed?

    Stalin also grabbed most of Eastern Europe after WWII. Ask anyone from those countries if an 'atheistic' method of government worked for them?

    In every Dictatorship the first people they imprison are the intellectuals, why? What are they afraid of?

    God gives us freedom to CHOOSE our way whether to believe in Him or deny Him. It is man who takes away your fundamental human rights, not God. And those who DO choose to do evil will eventually be held accountable before God.

    Just as the opposite of light is darkness there must also be an opposite to good what is that? Everything other than good is 'heinous'? The dictionary describes 'heinous' as an act of evil, extremely wicked, an abomination. Doesnt that actually mean that heinous is evil?

    Peace to you:)

    Marie

    ReplyDelete
  27. Tim,

    I typically do not post comments that are anti-Catholic here. I don't remember how your first post was worded, but if it sounded anti-Catholic or hateful toward the faith, then I deleted it.

    I am having difficulty myself understanding and believing that you are really a true atheist. I have known people who call themselves atheists because it is "fashionable" in these times to do so, when actually in their hearts and minds, they know there really is a God, but just don't "feel" Him in their lives. Many Hollywood celebrities and psuedo-intellectuals say they are atheists because they are proud, self-centered people with huge egos and want to take all the credit for their achievements or success. They often have a high internal locus of control (perceiving themselves as responsible for all that happens in their lives). However, when they are no longer successful and experience their lives come crashing down on them, they turn to alcohol or drugs and often, suicide because they feel totally responsible. In twelve step programs, which is used in most rehab programs, they teach people that there is a Higher Being and to believe in that Higher Being.

    I have a few questions for you. Suppose you were to get into an accident and develop serious brain damage or acquire brain cancer or Alzheimers or another disease affecting the way your mind functions, what would you have left? What if your family were destroyed in that accident or injured as you are? Who would you turn to in times of crisis? You are now an imperfect human being without that great intellect to make all those decisions for you. What do you do? What is the purpose of your existence? Does your suffering have any value? If you die, what awaits you?

    You say you were once Anglican and then you chose to be atheist after that. What was it that made you leave your faith?
    What was it that made you decide that God doesn't exist anymore for you?

    Do you believe in virtue? What is the basis for determining what's right or wrong in your life? Do you believe that you have a conscience?

    BTW, Catholics don't believe in contraception simply because the Pope says no. Those who know their faith know that is wrong to use contraception because it is a sin against human life. Contraceptives act as abortifacients and as such have the potential to destroy human life. Do you believe in murder, Tim? I don't and that's exactly what the pill does - it destroys the growing, developing human life within the mother. On a common sense level, contraceptives are simply not healthy for women in many ways. I have known women in their 20's to develop strokes and cancer from taking the pill and to develop tumors as a result of Depo Provera from I have written in detail about the things doctors and Planned Parenthood don't tell women about contraceptives, so I'm not going to go into all that here.

    I'm looking forward to hearing your responses.

    God bless you!

    ReplyDelete
  28. Omit the from After Depo Provera in the 7th paragraph above and replace it with a period.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Jean:)

    I suffer with M.E when I first got it I lost my sense of balance and also could not think coherently. Nobody could converse with me because I would forget the conversation. I was bedridden for 2 years, I couldnt walk, I could barely talk. What kept me going? My faith.

    Now IF I had got this illness BEFORE becoming a Christian I would most definately have committed suicide. To me that would have seemed logical. I had become non-productive, unable even to communicate. I would have viewed death as a realease into 'nothingness'.

    Once God is removed from the picture, then you have NO hope and without hope and faith, life is unbearable.

    I look forward to Tim's response. BTW Tim I admire the fact that you are also willing to debate these issues. Peace to you:)

    In peace:)

    Marie

    ReplyDelete
  30. Wow, Tim. I put a lot of effort into the development of an idea that you seem to have skirted over. Perhaps your comment below will help me get the job done right:

    You say, “Children being taught religious principles, ARE being taught anti-atheist principles such as the fact that you believe in a god. I have not taught my children anti-religious doctrine.”

    So...if a Catholic teaches that there is a god, they are guilty of teaching anti-atheist principles...but if an atheist teaches that there is no god, they are not guilty of teaching anti-religious principle. (A doctrine is a “particular principle....taught”.)

    I am insisting that, although the content of a Catholic or atheistic teaching may be extremely opposite in nature...the teaching can still be called ‘doctrine’ (see definition above) and those adhering to either teaching can both choose to be ‘religious’ about it. Somehow you are reasoning that because atheism does not officially organize or publically gather...that it is immune to such defining descriptions.

    In one of your responses, you mentioned that God (if he did exist) would understand you not participating in His faith. That may be so...but I wouldn’t bet on Him forgiving an outright abuse of logic (given your gift for debate). In our faith, we are taught that those who are given much are expected to use their gifts proportionately. I challenge you to really look hard at your deductions. Never mind convincing each other of theological truths or untruths...let us first convince each other that we are committed to truthful line of thought!

    ReplyDelete
  31. "...if the church condemns the book and warns parents not to allow their children to read it, then that's censorship, which is decidedly UN-American.'

    We'll have to agree to disagree. I have no problem with this - condemnations and warnings. You are still free to choose.

    The Catholic church condemns a lot of things, but it doesn't stop people from doing it anyway. It's the individual's choice as to how closely they follow their faith. The Saints got pretty close...not all people are saints, myself included. But I can aspire to be one and keep reaching.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Whew! Please forgive me if I skirt over, or miss some issues that some of you have brought up. I am trying to cover A LOT of ground here, and in one post, I had to answer ten people, so I sometimes get a little tired of typing and try and focus on some of the main points.

    Marie,

    Your question about evil is something that has been asked of me before. It may be semantics, but I relate evil to theism, in the sense that almost supernatural `badness'. While I think most people who commit truly anti-social acts (like Hitler and Ted Bundy) are sick, I don't think releasing them is the answer. I do believe the prison system is a complete failure, but I think it's much safer to have many of these people locked up than on the streets. And some people are simply beyond saving. The law sees someone who understands his own actions as sane, but I think anyone who commits premeditated murder, or pedophilia, or some other awful crime, is simply not right. I thi k there may be a time when society can rehabilitate these people, and prisons will be nothing like they are now (basically factories for criminal behaviour), but society is simply not advanced enough to do this now, apparently.

    As I said before, Hitler was not atheist, but Stalin and Mao did not commit their crimes because they were atheist, but because they were power hungry. It's the same with any brutal dictator, religious or not. The 20th century may have two examples of atheists who committed heinous acts (or acts that were violently anti-social), but history has a lot more brutal leaders who committed heinous acts in the name of their religion.

    You cannot force atheism on people anymore than you can force religion on people (as every major religion has done in the past- ask the Spanish). It's not atheism that was the problem in Russia, it was that Stalin was a psychopathic dictator who wanted to stamp out ANY resistance, and that included religion. Same with Mao. Power, was the real problem, not atheism. This is the same with the Spanish Inquisition and every other time where there has been mass killings. Catholic history has more than a couple of Popes that suffered the same problem as Stalin and Mao.

    Jean,

    I had no problem with you deleting my first reply. It detailed (at length) why I came to my beliefs. I'm pretty sure it would have been a little long for most people to read, anyway.

    And I assure you that I am atheist. I don't do it because it's fashionable, in fact it's not something I generally tell people (the internet is much more anonymous). There was not a moment that I decided. It was more a slow realization. I believed in God as I was growing up because it was the natural thing to do. I don't think I had any concept of what an atheist was. The first thing I realized, was that I was not Christian, because I didn't believe what Christians believed. Then I realized that I was agnostic, and about ten years ago, realized that I actually don't believe a god exists. There are many, many reasons. I didn't feel spurned by religion, or that religion didn't answer my questions. And it just `feels' right.

    Do I believe in virtue? I believe in doing good, but I don't believe in moral perfection.

    I already went over how I determine what's right and wrong a little. A lot of it is obvious. Some of it I may have to think about a little. But all of it has to do with making the world a better place. Sometimes for selfish reasons (because I do believe somewhat what goes around comes around, but not in a cosmic sense), but also because for somewhat altruistic reasons. I want to leave the world a better place than when I left for others. It's kind of like going into a forest and not throwing garbage down. I may never visit the forest again, but others will, and they don't want to see that.

    Do I have a conscience? well, it depends on what you mean by conscience. I think you have something in your brain that understands right from wrong, and that part in some people's brains simply do not work.

    As for contraceptives, there are many different kind. A condemn simply stops the sperm from even finding the egg. If you believe that that is abortion, then it might surprise you that the male body kills sperm all the time. It kills it so it can make more. If men do not copulate every three days or so, it's destroying the chance to create human life. As for the pill, it has become much safer over the years, and it does not abort the fetus (there is a morning after pill that is a little more invasive). The pill simply prevents the fertilized egg from attaching to the uterine wall, thus preventing pregnancy. Nature does this all the time without help, but the pill just makes this a more likely option.

    Now, I will answer your question about what I would turn to in the circumstances you mentioned. I would turn to me. My inner strength, which I believe comes from within, not outside. I have had bad times before, but suicide was NEVER an option. That's giving up, and besides, since I have no idea what happens when I die, it's not really something I would want to rush to. Anything is better than nothing.

    James,

    Again, I apologize about skirting over things, but you are only one of many whose questions I am trying to answer.

    Anyway, I don't teach my child atheistic principles. I don't teach them anything to do with that. When asked, I have simply told them what different people believe, and what I believe. I make it a point of not telling them anything I can't prove. I can't PROVE there is no god, but I do feel there is enough evidence to support my belief, in my opinion. I do teach her evolution, because that is an accepted scientific principle that cannot logically be argued against.

    If they asked what happens when you die, I would tell them the truth: I don't know.

    I haven't come to my conclusions lightly. I have thought long and hard about them. I don't feel I have abused logic in the slightest. In fact the opposite. I feel I am using it as well as I can.

    Belief in god is not logical, but neither is faith. A true religious person would never attempt a logical discussion about religion, because religion, itself, is illogical. And I don't mean that as a slight. This is actually something I have been told by religious leaders, and come to realize is true. I do admit to having some fun with quasi-religious people who haven't really thought about their beliefs, by trying to get them into a logical discussion about it. If anything, though, it makes them think about it, which is only beneficial.

    Alexandra,

    My problem is that A LOT of people look to the Church to tell them what to do and to think. A warning from the Catholic Church to many is the same as banning it. I think if you trust your people, you won't have to prevent them from reading something you may disapprove of. I trust my children enough that I would never tell them not to read something.

    ReplyDelete
  33. James,

    I reread your original post and wanted to add one more thing. You mentioned that people respond to act altruistically to a person, rather than a concept. I agree completely. I think there are MANY people that act the way they do BECAUSE of religion, and may not act that way if they were atheist. It scares me a little, but I agree. I also think religion has helped some people needed religion to help them through difficult times. Some people need religion. Simply put, I don't.

    ReplyDelete
  34. Okay, I'm getting a little type-weary, so that last post had a few grammatical mistakes. Hopefully you understood it.

    ReplyDelete
  35. Tim,

    I am a biologist and what you say about evolution is right.:-). I only wanted to point that as there are plenty of arguments for evolution, there are plenty of arguments for God too. Ultimately is a matter of choice and belief. You cannot prove that God does not exist. You did chose to believe that.

    If you will ever convert it will happen not because of the sort of arguments we bring here.

    I do not seek to convert you. As an ex-atheist who spend 20 years in a communist country I know what it takes for this kind of conversion.I know also what the atheism did breed in the 20th century.

    Wish you all the best

    ReplyDelete
  36. I want to thank all who participated in this discussion. At this point in time I think that there has been enough said on this particular topic.

    If anyone wishes to continue, I suggest you exchange email adresses with him.

    I want to thank everyone who posted here. You all did an excellent job!

    Tim, we will keep you in our prayers. :)

    PS Tim, I just went to your site at http://www.wearingfilm.com/photos.html and noticed that you a very talented photographer - a gift which I believe you have been given by God. When I look at your photos, I can't help but see the beauty of God in them.

    ReplyDelete
  37. Wow Tim, I agree, amazing photos ~ as a fellow (amateur) photographer I really enjoyed them :¬)

    I haven't anything to add to what others have already said, except to say you are now in my prayers.

    God bless,
    AR xx

    ReplyDelete
  38. Tim you say:
    "Catholic history has more than a couple of Popes that suffered the same problem as Stalin and Mao".

    You cannot compare the real abuses done by some popes with those done with Stalin and Mao. As someone whose people died in communist prisons I am very sensitive to this kind of statements.

    Tim, you know little of Catholicism and I am afraid that you simply do not want to know the truth about it.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Jean, Autumn Rose,

    Thanks for your kind words.

    Paula,

    You're right. I don't know a lot about Catholicism, but I do know quite a bit of history. There have been a few Popes that most of you would classify as truly evil. I am not comparing the atrocities committed by the Popes, Mao and Stalin, but simply stating that even Catholic history is littered with `evil-doers' who committed their own atrocities. If you don't agree, then I suggest you do some research on your own. And might I suggest reading something written by someone who doesn't have a stake in it.

    As for your last comment, I'm afraid it's not the truth you want me to know, but simply to agree with you. I'm afraid that's not going to happen.

    ReplyDelete
  40. Tim,

    would you be so kind to not assume things which are simply not true? As that I want you to agree with me.

    I just want you to have a little more respect for a Faith and Tradition you do not really know. Why don´t you instruct yourself about Catholicism before debating with catholics?

    Yes, what you said about the abuse of some popes is real.I know it.
    Yes, my comment was a bit out of place. Because you touched a nerve: the sensitivity of someone who is coming from an ex-communist country and who is still grieving for the victims killed by an atheist system. The sensitivity of someone who is deeply in love with Catholicism for many reasons...one is because her native country is build on it.

    My comments will end here.

    ReplyDelete
  41. Seems that Tim only knows the history he wants to know, which doesn't include the fact that in the last 60-80 years atheistic regimes have exterminated more people [who just happened to be of Christian faiths] than all the theistic leaders in all of history, including all of the popes put together. Therefore, historically speaking, Tim and his fellow atheistic believers haven't a leg to stand on.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated and are published at the blogger's discretion.

Blog Archive

Show more

Popular posts from this blog

The Spirituality and Miracles of St. Clare of Assisi

Saint Michael de Sanctis: Patron of Cancer Patients

Saint Gerard of Brogne: Patron of Abbots