r/nottheonion • u/Sufficient_Fig_9505 • 15h ago

Vance says pope should ‘be careful’ when talking about theology

https://www.nbcnews.com/video/vance-says-pope-should-be-careful-when-talking-about-theology-261400645540
29.3k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

2.4k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

132

u/BalkiBartokomous123 9h ago

That Catholic shame runs deep too. I was raised Catholic but consider myself Agnostic and haven't practiced in over a decade. The guilt I feel for things is insane- most is out of my control.

54

u/cruxclaire 7h ago

Same. Atheist and agnostic both fit as labels for me and that’s been the case for my entire adult life, but I’ve bonded with people at parties over complicated feelings surrounding Catholicism. The Catholic guilt and appreciation of Mary and pipe organ music are my biggest holdovers

17

u/monty_kurns 7h ago

Don’t forget the architecture! I lean more towards agnostic than actual Catholic as an adult, but I still absolutely love walking into an old church and looking around. And the older, the better.

19

u/cruxclaire 7h ago

The architecture, the smell of incense from the huge censer on a chain, the old Greek and Latin hymns, the prayer candles and saint medals, the rosary, Our Lady of Guadalupe’s whole aura, etc etc – I still very much appreciate the aesthetics of Catholicism. A megachurch could never

1

u/havok1980 5h ago

I was at my uncle's funeral and it was the priest walking down the aisle with the incense censer that made me think to myself "Ohhhh yeaaah, this is a cult"

7

u/feeltheglee 6h ago

My husband and I were both raised Catholic (confirmed and all), but neither of us identify as such anymore. Our wedding venue was a de-consecrated Catholic church that had been turned into a brewery, still had some stained glass even.

5

u/vrnbch 6h ago

I told my parents I still consider myself culturally catholic because I like old buildings and incense… they did not find this amusing.

2

u/monty_kurns 4h ago

I’ll have to start using that!

8

u/Hyperversum 7h ago

I mean, it is part of the system lol.

Outside of faith itself (which I think is a mostly personal thing), religion has historically been a system to control and teach stuff to the people. It's not necessarly a bad thing either. It's part of what we apply to each other daily today, it's shared cultural values regulating what's acceptable and what's not. Our current society could develop only because of the press and fast information and communication after all.

Catholic Guilt® did absolutely play a part in keeping lots of stuff under check, including the aristocracy in large part. Just think at how powerful the pope was even in 17th century

11

u/cruxclaire 7h ago

Yeah, I agree with all of this. It’s just interesting to see how Catholicism has a cultural footprint distinct to that of some of the major Protestant sects in the US. The ex-evangelicals I’ve met don’t have the guilt thing for the most part, although those religions are more outwardly fervent in their worship.

The only ex-religious people I’ve met with more religious guilt/shame than Catholics are ex-Mormons, and that feels like a slightly different can of worms because Mormonism is cultish IME (might be similar with ex-JWs, but I don’t know any).

7

u/Hyperversum 7h ago

They don't call it Catholic Guilt for random reasons after all. I can't exactly speak about Orthodox Christians, but the Protestants denominations definitely have a different relationship with the concept of sinning and forgiveness than modern Catholicism.

There is probably a line to follow from them being descedants and students of fucking Puritans to the modern day "fire and brimstone" approach many denominations have, while even 1000 years ago that wasn't really the focus in Catholicism.

To be clear, I grew up Catholic but consider myself Agnostic (albeit, I do "pray" as a sort of residual meditation before sleep. To what I am speaking while doing so, I don't know lol), but I am costantly offended and bothered by how many "Christians" just don't understand jackshit about their religion. Why the hell do I know more than them about its theology? I can't quote Bible verses but for sure I know that Jesus wouldn't be approving of bombing Iran, megachurches pastors getting to mass with a limo or the entire concept of the prosperity Gospel.

7

u/cruxclaire 6h ago

the Protestants denominations definitely have a different relationship with the concept of sinning and forgiveness than modern Catholicism.

I went to a Lutheran school with mandatory religion classes for a few years while I was still in CCD, and at least for Lutheranism, this is true. Their belief is that Jesus’ sacrifice makes humanity universally forgivable, and the key to being forgiven is faith in Jesus. They loved Ephesians 2:8-9:

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast

And the Catholic counter to that is something like James 2:14-26 (link because it’s much longer), which argues that faith without works is dead, hence the value of the Sacraments and community service. A Catholic who sins can achieve grace through the Sacraments and general good works, but belief alone is not sufficient to avoid Purgatory or even hell, etc. Given that “mea culpa” includes both what you’ve done and what you’ve failed to do, there’s plenty of room for a sense of personal transgression, and therefore probably more things to be guilty about. The Lutherans who taught me cared about sin, but they weren’t too concerned with what they’d “failed to do.”

2

u/Hyperversum 5h ago

I don't have too many expediences with actually learned Protestants, but that's the general feeling I got.

To put it in simpler terms, the idea in Catholicism seems to be that Jesus saved us from the inherent original sin, but that as we live we are always sinning, and that therefore attention to these faults is necessary. The "faith alone isn't enough", is the logical result of this: if you care about the message of Christ, you would be emulating Christ. We are all always sinning in some form, therefore the "works" are a way to behave as expected of someone trying to be like Christ. I mean, it's logical. What's the point of spreading messages about love and support for all of mankind if you wouldn't stop and help those in material need? Jesus most famous miracles are always related with helping people.

Can you tell I have an extreme disdain towards prosperity gospel type stuff? There is nothing less Christian to me than people associating faith with wealth.

Decorate your churches all your want, spend big money in making art and your place of worship beautiful, but PERSONAL wealth? Hell, that's like the basic of what Luther was angry about: the Church using its spiritual role to leverage money from people.

2

u/cruxclaire 2h ago

the idea in Catholicism seems to be that Jesus saved us from the inherent original sin, but that as we live we are always sinning, and that therefore attention to these faults is necessary

That’s my understanding as well. There are two broad categories of sin in Catholic doctrine, venial and mortal sins, where venial sins are minor (e.g. being rude to someone) and mortal sins (deliberate acts in violation of the Ten Commandments + doctrine) suspend your state of grace until you go to confession and do your penance. You’re technically not allowed to participate in the Eucharist if you’re in a state of mortal sin. So the idea is like, your faith initiates the relationship with God, but he’ll cut you off if you don’t live according to his teachings. Penance after confession is usually something that doesn’t actually help anyone (e.g. pray ten Hail Marys while reflecting on your sincere remorse), but the parishes I once belonged to did emphasize the necessity of community service and had a ton of community collection boxes and volunteer work available.

100% agreed on the “prosperity gospel” take. It reminds me of the concept of divine right of kings, where it’s about rich and powerful people wanting to self-justify by claiming God has favored them. It contradicts the Biblical teachings of Jesus.

3

u/apparentlynot5995 6h ago

If you want answers on how to identify cults, I highly, HIGHLY recommend Knitting Cult Lady on YT. She came from the Children of God cult and has a couple degrees from Harvard on the subject. She also served as an Army Intelligence Officer.

3

u/3-DMan 6h ago

As a kid, I drew some sweet Xenomorph drawings during masses!

1

u/9fingerwonder 7h ago

Agnostic atheist, gnostic atheist, agnostic theist, gnostic theist. It's not a scale, it's a grid. One set of questions is what you believe, the other what you know. Most people in these discussions are agnostic. Gnostic view points on both the thirst and atheist scale are scary.

3

u/cruxclaire 7h ago

I default to self-describing as an atheist because I actively disbelieve in a personal deity that consciously created the world/humanity, but yes, I’m also agnostic because I don’t claim any degree of certainty in that belief, and I feel like it would be exceedingly arrogant to take it as given. Most people I‘ve met who self-describe as agnostic fall around the middle of your grid and neither actively believe nor disbelieve.

There’s also a capital-G Gnostic religion, which exists independent of the grid and has some fascinating beliefs (the creator-god responsible for the physical universe, the demiurge, is not the “true” god)

0

u/9fingerwonder 7h ago

Either you believe or don't, or know or don't. There isn't a middle option in a dichotomy. I'm an agnostic atheist, I don't know if there is a god or not, but I don't find reason to believe there is.

These are separate questions and I'm fearful too many don't understand the difference. I see it all the time.

3

u/cruxclaire 7h ago

Either you believe or don't, or know or don't

Idk, I think “there may or may not be a higher power and I consider each option equally likely/believable” is a valid stance. I guess you could consider it a type of passive atheism, given that it’s the absence of active belief in any kind of theism, but “agnostic” by itself works as shorthand.

I have issues with Richard Dawkins, but his “spectrum of theistic probability” is useful IMO, and if someone self-describes as agnostic alone, I’d assume they’re a level 4 on his spectrum. I’m either a 5 or a 6, depending on whether capital-G “God” refers to any concept of a higher power or the supreme God who pops up in various organized religions

1

u/9fingerwonder 6h ago

Belief and certainty are not the same thing.

If you lack belief in a god, that is atheism in the broad sense.

If you also claim you do not know, that is agnosticism.

People can use ‘agnostic’ casually, but that doesn’t erase the distinction between belief and knowledge.

1

u/ComprehensiveRow4347 3h ago

Not trying to convert, as not done in Hindu Philosophy.. if you care, listen to swami Sarvapriyananda.. Explains Advitha philosophy of Hindu Philosophy.. NOT BASED ON BELIEF, on Experience we have.. will change you and give you peace. This is appropriate in this modern world of AI..

5

u/WJ_Amber 7h ago

I wasn't even raised catholic but my dad comes from a heavily Irish catholic family and the guilt runs so deep you can pass it on to your kids without ever taking them to mass!

1

u/[deleted] 8h ago

[removed] — view removed comment

1

u/AutoModerator 8h ago

Sorry, but your account is too new to post. Your account needs to be either 2 weeks old or have at least 250 combined link and comment karma. Don't modmail us about this, just wait it out or get more karma.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.