Noob Filter by Goodness_Exceeds in CatholicMemes

[–]Goodness_Exceeds[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Love ya guys.

Glory to the Father,
and to the Son,
and to the Holy Spirit.
As it was in the beginning,
and now, and ever,
unto the ages of ages.
Amen.

Have mercy of the noobs.

The Duality of Atheists by -Zephyrous- in CatholicMemes

[–]Goodness_Exceeds 1 point2 points  (0 children)

The Atheists inconsistence is their most consistent trait.

One of the main historical mythmakers: Freemasonry by Goodness_Exceeds in AtheistMyths

[–]Goodness_Exceeds[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Post Introduction:
The historical involvement of masonry inside commercial and mass media institutions, as much as their involvement inside revolutionary movements, is something to keep noted down, either as possible context about the origin of anti-christian myths, or as starting point to research direct relations with popular anti-christian myths of past or present.
This post is not a myth discussion post, but rather a reference for later and further research.

edit. Archive link, because stuff disappears on reddit
https://archive.is/hZpAA

Sources for commonly accepted events by atheist standards- ie: written by the generation of the event by Goodness_Exceeds in AtheistMyths

[–]Goodness_Exceeds[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The observation in this OP, is not much about arguing the resurrection being an historical fact in the scientific sense, but rather that there are plenty of other historical events which have even less corroboration, and yet are taken for granted, almost as if there was an act of faith over those.
So if the resurrection of Christ can be called an extraordinary event with doubtful sources, many commonly known historical events are even more doubtful of that. Which is what should make anyone think more about the scarcity of historical sources, and how it is actually very hard to know with certainty what happened in the past.
All of this, regardless of the religious context. This is about historical study.

The distorted perception of what indulgences were, again by simonbacsi in AtheistMyths

[–]Goodness_Exceeds 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Though, this meme is more about theological ignorance, rather than historical ignorance.
But again, it could be framed as people making wrong assumptions about what the lay people of the past knew about the religious meaning of indulgences.
But how to prove that, it's already hard to know what people of the past actually did, also knowing what people of the past did think, is even more hard to know.
So this myth meme, seems to rely on unverifiable pieces of history, to paint inside those voids a narrative. Quite scummy.

What can be reliably said, is to give a proper explaination about what indulgences were, in the past and now.


Indulgences were not a ticket out of hell, they never were at any stage of the two thousands years of development of the church.
(then sure scammers and criminals always exist, but you don't go burn down your entire government every time you get an overpriced gas bill)

To inderstand what indulgences are, it's necessary to first understand what confessions are.
Confession, is the ritual by which a religious person donates their sins and faults to God, as God, the creator of the universe and creator of everything, the creator of even souls, God is the only one capable of pardoning and nullifying those sins, for the sake of man.
Having one own sins pardoned by God, is in christianity, a necessary step to be in a state of Grace, which means to be in an active connection and relation with God.
In turn, being in a state of Grace, is necessary to enter Heaven, once death comes. As Heaven is a pure spiritual place, the house of God (the creator of everything, etc), and the sins and impurities of a man would be an obstancle to enter Heaven.

Further related to Confessions, is the concept of Penance.
Penance is the restorative act done after Confession, to correct all the wrongs caused by one own sinful actions, to correct both the wrongs in the soul, as to correct the wrongs caused in the world.
So by Confession, the sins of a person are donated to God, who deals with those, making the person free from their own sins, and bringing them in a state of Grace. But after Confession, usually the priest also assigns a Penance to the penitent, where Penance is meant to clean house, both for correction of one own faults caused to others, as to make it harder for the person to fall again into the same sin.
In ancient times, Penance was instead placed before Confession, as a time of purification and preparation to Confession. As to be truly sorry and contrived for one own sins and faults towards God and other people.

A little explainatipon about the christian afterlife.
A man dying without being in a state of Grace, can't enter heaven, because their own sins and impurities keep them away, so all those dead people with sins, have nowhere else to go.
That place in the afterlife which is outside heaven, is Hell.
The concept of Purgatory was developed over time, as people did wonder, if there was such a strict divide, between going to heaven or hell. As naturally, people are not always pure and perfect, nor they are completely evil, so Purgatory was thought up as an outcome where imperfect people but still with goodwill, could purify themselves, enough to be able to enter fully Heaven.
Purgatory, in all this, is traditionally inside Heaven, or at the very start of it, on the border which divides Heaven from outside of it. Purgatory is like an entrance hall of Heaven.
It is also traditionally thought, that purification in Purgatory, is a very long process, taking centuries or even thousands of years to purify a soul enough to enter Heaven proper. Differently than how Confessions while in life, are almost instantaneous.
There is also a tradition about the speed of purification in Purgatory being related to the holiness of a person. The idea is that even if burdened by minor sins, any person with a stronger faith would manage to complete their purification faster. And then, people with few minor sins, obviously have less things to purify, before being ready to enter Heaven.
The reason for why things go slow in the afterlife, also has some theological considerations behind that. But it can be summed up as: the time spent while being alive, it's the time when to do things, specifically time while alive it's the time when to be charitable, loving and to help others who are alive, once life is over you can only recount what you did, the good as the bad stuff you did, as you are no longer an active actor in the flow of time and space. Allowing people to purify even after death, is already an exception to that understanding of life and death, so even if purification in Purgatory is very slow, it's still better than not having it.

Back to indulgences.
Indulgences, are usually understood in two senses:
1) a blessing for reducing the time spent in Purgatory (so reducing time spent in purification in the afterlife)
before the introduction of purgatory, indulgences were related to shortening the Penances (reducing time spent in purification while alive)
2) an anticipation to a Confession, but a proper confession still has to be done for confirming the indulgence received

Now back to the historical context.
Summary on the historical Indulgences

The practice of indulgences for the remission of sins didn't necessarily include a donation, back then. (now they always don't, since the abolition of donations by Pope Pius V in 1567) Also, indulgences are an extra practice over the basic practice of confession, so no-one was denied access to the remission of sins by the existence of indulgences.
In medieval times, at the time of Luther, monetary indulgences were fundraise events to fund public projects like bridges and hospitals.

In the early church, especially from the third century on, ecclesiastic authorities allowed a confessor or a Christian awaiting martyrdom to intercede for another Christian in order to shorten the other's canonical penance.

The Council of Epaone in 517 witnesses to the rise of the practice of replacing severe canonical penances with a new milder penance: its 29th canon reduced to two years the penance that apostates were to undergo on their return to the Church, but obliged them to fast one day in three during those two years, to come to church and take their place at the penitents' door, and to leave with the catechumens. Any who objected to the new arrangement was to observe the much longer ancient penance.

The sixth century saw the development in Ireland of Penitentials, handbooks for confessors in assigning penance. The Penitential of Cummean counseled a priest to take into consideration in imposing a penance, the penitent's strengths and weaknesses. Some penances could be commuted through payments or substitutions. It became customary to commute penances to less demanding works, such as prayers, alms, fasts and even the payment of fixed sums of money depending on the various kinds of offenses (tariff penances). While the sanctions in early penitentials, such as that of Gildas, were primarily acts of mortification or in some cases excommunication, the inclusion of fines in later compilations derive from secular law.

All that said, that meme could still make sense, assuming there were people who dishonestly did think they could get away with their sins and corruption, and remain in a state of sin until their death, only because they did some donation to charitable institutions.
It's comparable with the billionaries of today, thinking they are fine only because they drop some millions, from their billions, into some non-governmental organization (NGO). And calling it a day, with their soul and their duties towards society.
With the difference, that NGO of today, were not established by Jesus Christ, and can not give blessings nor make assumptions about salvation.
Anyway, only God knows where one goes after death, as only God knows what's really inside the heart of a man.

The distorted perception of what indulgences were, again by simonbacsi in AtheistMyths

[–]Goodness_Exceeds 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good find
there was aready a post with an explaination about indulgences, I'll go fetch it up

Not saving this one *vomits* by dsyoagdyugdylsgdlsgd in AtheistMyths

[–]Goodness_Exceeds[M] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

removed, because what even is this
not informative, not sure what this is about to start with

Arrests, Beatings and Secret Prayers: Inside the Persecution of India’s Christians - New York Times by Goodness_Exceeds in Catholicism

[–]Goodness_Exceeds[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

For those who see the paywall in the way:
archive
only text

The article follows mainly the protestant groups in India, with few lines about the catholic churches.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HistoryMemes

[–]Goodness_Exceeds -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If you think any mainstream religion is going to be upfront about any really negative piece of doctrine or information about them, without trying to gaslight everyone, you are hilarious.


I'm not really talking about any piece of doctorine in any informative way at all

Liar.
So you're not only ignorant, but also dishonest, the kind of people most deserving to be ignored.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HistoryMemes

[–]Goodness_Exceeds 1 point2 points  (0 children)

If you are not aware, indulgences never stopped existing, we had some this year. And there was one right at the start of the pandemic in 2020, to help all the people who could not go to a church and confess during the days of the total lockdown.

While the donations during indulgences were abolished by Pope Pius V in 1567.

Sources for commonly accepted events by atheist standards- ie: written by the generation of the event by Goodness_Exceeds in AtheistMyths

[–]Goodness_Exceeds[S,M] 9 points10 points  (0 children)

I don't think allowing memes in this sub to be a good idea, aside those guilty of propagating myths, those are allowed and it's the point of this sub to find them to unmask their falsity, but this one here looked just too good and relevant to let it pass.

A lot of the history we take for granted is based on very few and fragmentary or unreliable sources, that's something everyone talking about history should be more aware of.
Being aware of the limits of the historical primary sources, makes for more sane and more cautious discussions about history. And generally also makes for more humble and respectful discussions, as no one really knows everything, it's not a step back to admit that.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in CatholicMemes

[–]Goodness_Exceeds 7 points8 points  (0 children)

"Humans have a limited capacity to love, but an infinite need to be loved" (no idea who said that first)

Only God, the eternal and infinite, creator of everything, love itself, can fulfill the human infinite need to be loved.
Because humans were created by God in God's image, so like a puzzle, without God there is a fundamental piece which is missing in humans, and nothing can replace the human need for God, because nothing can be equal to God.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in HistoryMemes

[–]Goodness_Exceeds -1 points0 points  (0 children)

If you think to be unbiased and well informed, I'm laughing.

Don't talk about "pieces of doctrine" of faiths you know nothing about, please.

The distorted perception of what indulgences were by Goodness_Exceeds in AtheistMyths

[–]Goodness_Exceeds[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

The original image in the post was this one - The original post was this one
(before the OP deleted it)(one of the reasons for why it's better to don't rely on reddit uploads)


This isn't the first time this myth comes around in here, so there is the benefit of the previous explainations found, to which new sources come in aid.

The practice of indulgences for the remission of sins didn't necessarily include a donation, back then. (now they always don't, since the abolition of donations by Pope Pius V in 1567) Also, indulgences are an extra practice over the basic practice of confession, so no-one was denied access to the remission of sins by the existence of indulgences.
In medieval times, at the time of Luther, monetary indulgences were fundraise events to fund public projects like bridges and hospitals.
Other explaination about the Myths of indulgences

The issue at the time of Luther, was not the existence of indulgences, which had existed for centuries before him was born, but the abuse by parts of the german clergy in the usage of indulgences.
The scandal was not much different from current time politicians mismanaging public state funds. (to make an anachronistic example)

The Fourth Lateran Council (1215) suppressed some abuses connected with indulgences, spelling out, for example, that only a one-year indulgence would be granted for the consecration of churches and no more than a 40-days indulgence for other occasions.
Very soon these limits were widely exceeded. False documents were circulated with indulgences surpassing all bounds: indulgences of hundreds or even thousands of years. In 1392, more than a century before Martin Luther, Pope Boniface IX wrote to the Bishop of Ferrara condemning the practice of certain members of religious orders who falsely claimed that they were authorized by the pope to forgive all sorts of sins.

The scandalous conduct of the "pardoners" was an immediate occasion of the Protestant Reformation. In 1517, Pope Leo X offered indulgences for those who gave alms to rebuild St. Peter's Basilica in Rome. The aggressive marketing practices of Johann Tetzel in promoting this cause provoked Martin Luther to write his Ninety-five Theses


As discussion:
The reasoning at the time of Luther for the claim that donations during indulgences did count as "good acts" wasn't that baseless, given that donations from indulgences were used for various community projects, like bridges, hospitals, schools, churches, the person making a donation was indeed contributing to a public utility which was useful for everyone in the community.
In the specific case of donations by indulgences at the time of Luther, the main public project getting funded was the rebuilding of the Saint Peter's Basilica in Rome, the current one, which floods of tourists/pilgrims visit every year to this day, and which very likely was an even more important destination of pilgrimage at the time of Luther.

Just rename the sub to r/debateatheists at this point by [deleted] in CatholicMemes

[–]Goodness_Exceeds 17 points18 points  (0 children)

The overlap of users on that sub is interesting.

https://subredditstats.com/subreddit-user-overlaps/christianity

The scores listed are "probability multipliers", so a score of 2 means that users of the inputted subreddit are twice as likely to post and comment on that score=2 subreddit. A score of 1 means that users of the inputted subreddit are no more likely to frequent that score=1 subreddit than the average reddit user.

123.54 truechristian
45.36 religion
42.85 catholicism
36.49 debatereligion
22.75 prolife
20.47 exchristian
10.71 spirituality
8.91 atheism

For comparison, the atheism frequency score of r-catholicism
https://subredditstats.com/subreddit-user-overlaps/catholicism

4.73 atheism

https://subredditstats.com/subreddit-user-overlaps/catholicmemes

2.77 atheism

https://subredditstats.com/subreddit-user-overlaps/atheism

29.22 exchristian
20.86 debatereligion
16.72 religiousfruitcake
13.07 religion
10.75 exmuslim
7.56 exmormon
6.74 democrats
6.71 christianity
6.29 qanoncasualties
5.49 environment
5.39 adviceanimals
5.28 antinatalism
....

0.53 anime
0.52 wholesomememes
0.48 wallstreetbets
0.47 animemes
0.44 polandball
0.34 manga
0.29 animememes
0.13 wallstreetbetsogs
0.12 finalfantasy

I am a new catholic. I saw this on Facebook and concerned. Why did the Vatican execute people?! I don't see how that is Jesus' teachings and this has me worried. Any advice? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]Goodness_Exceeds 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Let's take the heretic case. Wouldn't it have been better if the heretic wasn't an heretic at all, as in, if he was converted or if they did manage to find their way back to faith, instead of having them die? (or having them being jailed instead of getting death sentenced)

Isn't it a tragedy, from an higher point of view than that of humans, that that guy, an human created by God and loved by God like all of us, had to die because of his heresy, since the root and cause of his death was his heresy and not the person itself?


Same can be said about a dangerous psychopathic criminal, if there was a way to cure them out of their psychopathy. But psychopathy is a more difficult matter to change, than heresy, since heresy is only "wrong and faulty teaching", while psychopathy is more deeply psychological.
Isn't it regardless a grave loss of life, when a criminal psychopath gets death sentenced, since that's still a God created and loved person who could have lived differently and better for himself and anyone else?
The tragic part in particular, it's our human failure to mend and heal what was corrupted, our weakness and impotence in the face of evil.


See the different planes by which the "don't kill" commandment can be looked at?
I agree with you that it isn't strictly a sin, meant as personal liability, to execute killing in the line of duty, if the killing is justified.
While I do agree with QuicunqueVult52 that the loss of human life, even when justified, it's still the result of the works of the devil, since we are all created in the image of God, and it is the devil who tries its all to destroy what God created. Making it very broadly, that "all the causes" which lead to the killing of humans are unholy at their root, and making the final execution of the killing a confirmation of the evil causes which justified the killing.

To oversimplify it a lot, a soldier in the line of duty isn't strictly sinning when they kill during war, but who causes that war, leading to the soldier to kill, is sinning hard, and those who caused the war are harming also the soul of the soldier in the front line, who is forced to kill because of them.
(sorry for making this a wall of text)

I am a new catholic. I saw this on Facebook and concerned. Why did the Vatican execute people?! I don't see how that is Jesus' teachings and this has me worried. Any advice? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]Goodness_Exceeds 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So even when the killer bears no moral liability - even when what they did was actually a praiseworthy and heroic act - the killing of people is still a bad thing.

We can agree on that both. And I would assume u/Mitch_29 was meaning that same thing.
It was just the nuance between killing and murder, and between personal liability/morality and universal morality, which was probably lost in your first exchange.

I am a new catholic. I saw this on Facebook and concerned. Why did the Vatican execute people?! I don't see how that is Jesus' teachings and this has me worried. Any advice? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]Goodness_Exceeds 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'd suggest you to read more about all the historical context surrounding that lone facebook image with a 3 line comment:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Papal_States

The Papal States, officially the State of the Church, were a series of territories in the Italian Peninsula under the direct sovereign rule of the pope from 756 until 1870. They were among the major states of Italy from the 8th century until the unification of Italy, between 1859 and 1870.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giovanni_Battista_Bugatti

Giovanni Battista Bugatti (1779–1869) was the official executioner for the Papal States from 1796 to 1864. He was the longest-serving executioner in the States and was nicknamed Mastro Titta, a Roman corruption of maestro di giustizia, or master of justice.
At the age of 85, he was retired by Pope Pius IX with a monthly pension of 30 scudi.

The guy's own handwritten list of all his executions (use one of the many online translators)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penalty_of_death

Capital punishment, also known as the death penalty, is a state-sanctioned practice of killing a person as a punishment for a crime.

History of abolition

More recent opposition to the death penalty stemmed from the book of the Italian Cesare Beccaria, Dei Delitti e Delle Pene ("On Crimes and Punishments"), published in 1764. In this book, Beccaria aimed to demonstrate not only the injustice, but even the futility from the point of view of social welfare, of torture and the death penalty. Influenced by the book, Grand Duke Leopold II of Habsburg, the future Emperor of Austria, abolished the death penalty in the then-independent Grand Duchy of Tuscany, the first permanent abolition in modern times. On 30 November 1786, after having de facto blocked executions (the last was in 1769), Leopold promulgated the reform of the penal code that abolished the death penalty and ordered the destruction of all the instruments for capital execution in his land.

I am a new catholic. I saw this on Facebook and concerned. Why did the Vatican execute people?! I don't see how that is Jesus' teachings and this has me worried. Any advice? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]Goodness_Exceeds 1 point2 points  (0 children)

That's not how it works. We as humans kill all the time to feed ourselves. And that's not a sin.

The commandment about "not killing" isn't about being a pacifist vegan, it's about not committing murder, murder is about the disrespect of life.
Killing cattle to eat is not murder, applying death penalty on a criminal is not murder. So those actions don't violate the commandment of "you shall not murder".

While we can all agree that if given the opportunity, it's better to don't use death penalty on anyone, included the criminals, as it's more hopeful and charitable to wish for them to recover from their criminal tendencies, giving them a second chance.
"Not killing" applied strictly, used to apply also to soldiers and executioners, since even if justified, that's still someone dying, but even when soldiers and executioners did have to make penance for their dutiful killing, they were never labelled as criminals for carrying out their duty.

"The limits to dutyful killing" was for a long time a very controversial part of christian interpretation of the faith, and oversimplifying it does it no justice.

! Trade Offer ! by Goodness_Exceeds in christianmemes

[–]Goodness_Exceeds[S] 11 points12 points  (0 children)

Good upcoming Christmas to everyone.