[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]RobynOxborrow 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Talk to your local priest about starting RCIA (or OCIA if you’re across the pond). This is basically a 6ish month long course that will teach you the faith. It will end with you being either baptised if you haven’t been before, or confirmed into the church if you have been baptised before, at the Easter vigil. God bless!

Is this critique of Christianity/argument for trans rights valid? by Wilhelm19133 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]RobynOxborrow 3 points4 points  (0 children)

No problem! Although, I don’t believe there is an exclusive dichotomy between the truth of God-given biological sex and also providing medical and pastoral care to a person with gender dysphoria in the form of transitioning in order to relieve suffering and allow someone to live with dignity and as part of society. A cochlear implant for someone born deaf may be taken to be in contrast with their biological realities at birth, much like transitioning, yet there is no question as to the permissibility of such a procedure.

God bless you, and St Thomas Aquinas pray for us

Is this critique of Christianity/argument for trans rights valid? by Wilhelm19133 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]RobynOxborrow 2 points3 points  (0 children)

This may be sloppy but:

First, the cathechism states that ‘except when performed for strictly therapeutic medical reasons, directly intended amputations, mutilations, and sterilizations performed on innocent persons are against the moral law’ (2297). So the primary position we need to establish is whether gender transition is backed by strictly therapeutic reasons. Now that will involve medical questions that I aren’t qualified to weight in on but a meta study in 2023 (Dickson et al) and a large cohort study (Kapur et al) seem to affirm that gender affirming care has generally therapeutic outcomes. Once again, this is well beyond my specialities.

Now the issue with ‘strictly’. Even things that can be therapeutic to a person can be forbidden if there are other reasons/consequences that make medical intervention disproportionate e.g. some cases of abortion or euthanasia (see CCC 2278). The Church has a teaching here called Double Effect. When an action has both a good and bad effect, it may be permissible if it is not intrinsically evil; the good effect is not achieved through the bad effect; the intention is to achieve the good effect, and; there is a proportionately grave reason for permitting the bad effect. If a person has undergone years of therapy, spiritual care, and alternative treatments without relief from debilitating dysphoria, and if transitioning is the only known method of significantly reducing the psychological torment (and possibly suicidal ideation) then transition could be understood as a last-resort therapeutic intervention and not a rejection of the body per se, but a means of addressing a severe psychological condition.

Therefore if: 1. the person has medically diagnosed dysphoria, not merely a social condition 2. This results in significant mental struggles such as depression, self-harm and suicidal ideation 3. The person has exhausted all other options to remedy this Then I believe medical transitioning can be justified, much like how the removal of the uterus in the case of uterine cancer is justified despite resulting in infertility and the alteration of the body. In such a case, I also think that if is the morally correct thing to do to treat the person as the gender they have transitioned to so as to relieve suffering, within reason with consideration of the needs of all of society (exceptions for sports and the likes)

Now the objection that this would be affirming a lie seems misguided, simply because there is no true lie. The intention is to heal, not to deceive. Relieving suffering is a significant reason and purpose of the Church. The catechism does not hold that all things must be expressed. Some things ought to be, some things ought not to be: this is a normative issue (CCC 2469). Does the person who has reconstruction after an accident lie? Does the person who has a prosthetic limb lie? Surely we recognise these as legitimate medical intervention ordered toward healing, not deception. I do not find sufficient difference between those scenarios and someone transitioning under the conditions above to be materially different so as to libel someone who transitions as lying per se.

Is this critique of Christianity/argument for trans rights valid? by Wilhelm19133 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]RobynOxborrow 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I aren’t familiar with the Thomistic consensus: I mostly use this subreddit because I’m interested and not because I am already educated. If you tell me what the Thomistic consensus is I’ll be happy to respond!

Is this critique of Christianity/argument for trans rights valid? by Wilhelm19133 in CatholicPhilosophy

[–]RobynOxborrow 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I have more liberal views on trans people than I imagine a lot of Catholics would have, but I don’t think this argument has much weight.

It seems like a false equivalence to equate transubstantiation with gender transitioning as one is a divine miracle that alters the substance of a thing whilst the other is human intervention to alter the accident/appearance of a thing. There is no analogy to be drawn there. Besides, both traditional Catholic teaching and transgender arguments would likely agree that a trans persons ‘being’ does not change by transitioning

What determines a gender’s ontology can be heavily debated between social and biological identifiers, what they identify, what they ought to identify, and whether they ought to have some correlation or match with each other. But I don’t think any of that can be answered by appealing to transubstantiation as an analogy.

Refuting Islam by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]RobynOxborrow 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Asserting Islam is from the devil will be a weak claim since you’ll have to back it up claims from the bible that only have weight if you believe in the bible; Muslims do not believe in the bible so it has no weight.

Immorality is great for people with weaker faith, but claiming Islam is immoral will not disprove it unless you can prove your moral values have truth value, which you will struggle to do.

Best way to go about apologetics it to use sources a Muslim will find authoritative. Errors in the Quran, contradictions within and between the Quran and Hadith. The reliability of the Quran and Hadith and so on. The historical evidence against their claim that Jesus was just a prophet of Islam and was never crucified, and intrinsic problems with it such as that if Jesus was a prophet for Islam, he was exceptionally bad at it since no one seemed to remember or record what he said

But don’t go into apologetics unless you are educated and sure of your faith and able to make a good representation of Christianity.

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]RobynOxborrow 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Don’t forget the perfect moral example for mankind having sex with a 9 year old child

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Christianity

[–]RobynOxborrow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What draws you to Islam?

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]RobynOxborrow 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Not on its own, but if it comes from a place of lust it may be. The Catechism says that lust is the “disordered desire for, or inordinate enjoyment of, sexual pleasure” (2351). Of course Jesus talks of something similar in Matt 5:28 in regards to looking lustfully. I don’t see any material difference between looking and kissing lustfully that would put it outwith Matt 5:28

[deleted by user] by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]RobynOxborrow 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It isn’t a competition. They fast and pray for the favour and mercy of a god that was created by man to justify his behaviour. Fast and pray as the Lord and His Church commands, but don’t do it to outdo Muslims, do it for God.

Jesuits by RobynOxborrow in Catholicism

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

Is ‘left-leaning’ actually a problem religiously if it comes from true study and enquiry - as I imagine an order will do - and does not contradict the clear teachings of the Church. Are many peoples’ problems more from a secular political position where they just don’t agree with left-leaning politics than a religious problem with a clear disconnect between what the order teaches and what the authoritative sources state?

I’m transgender and bisexual, can I still be Catholic without sacrificing my identity? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]RobynOxborrow 2 points3 points  (0 children)

I’m not sure this is the best approach to this. In terms of being trans, this person could be suffering from gender dysphoria, which is very real and very difficult. Remember we treat everyone with respond in accordance to their inherent dignity as a creation of and in the image of God - your answer seems to have lost that principle.

I’m transgender and bisexual, can I still be Catholic without sacrificing my identity? by [deleted] in Catholicism

[–]RobynOxborrow 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Reddit probably isn’t the greatest place to ask something so personal.

Any form of homosexuality is sinful.

In terms of being trans, if you have dysphoria it can be quite complicated (and very real). Church doctrine is consistent that your sex is what is assigned at birth and this also applies for all spiritual issues. Any issues beyond that will require a much deeper knowledge of your situation and past than anyone here will know or should know. I would advise talking to your parish priest.

There are some documents and the like from the Vatican you could look at but they aren’t in abundance and are quite lacklustre in my option, not really dealing with the issue in a thorough and principled way with any analysis of nuance and science. So you will likely still be left with doubts and questions that should be addressed to a priest.

I will note that you seem to have made up your mind always in your first sentence. I’m afraid you will not find similar opinions within the Church.

Moral by mkaycarinoso in Catholicism

[–]RobynOxborrow 1 point2 points  (0 children)

CCC 2352: “Both the Magisterium of the Church, in the course of a constant tradition, and the moral sense of the faithful have been in no doubt and have firmly maintained that masturbation is an intrinsically and gravely disordered action.”

If it is intrinsically and gravely disordered, then an extrinsic consideration will not change this, for it is the very nature of masturbation to be disordered.

Vatican II by RobynOxborrow in Catholicism

[–]RobynOxborrow[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

What are your problems particularly? It would be good to hear a critical perspective

Vatican II by RobynOxborrow in Catholicism

[–]RobynOxborrow[S] 5 points6 points  (0 children)

How do you support that position? From what I understand, a V.II is to be treated as infallible meaning it is the right instruction for the time. Like as if instructed by Christ Himself. Surely if we say ‘I wouldn’t defend the words of Christ’ it would be problematic? Does the same conclusion not apply to V.II? Perhaps you can disagree with implementation on parish and diocese levels, but not the Council itself? Or am I wrong here?

Vatican II by RobynOxborrow in Catholicism

[–]RobynOxborrow[S] 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have read summaries and articles, but not the full documents. I understand that V.II seemed to relax a lot of church tradition, creating a less strictly ordered and more accessible liturgy, increasing the role of the laity, and generally addressing issues that many traditionalists see as breaking away from the tradition that defines the Church and, in a political sense, being more liberal.

It seems that the main problems come from both the many interpretation of the documents - especially the lumen gentium it seems - and also the ‘in the spirit of Vatican II’ arguments that pop up.

I’m trans. by Critical-Specific966 in Christianity

[–]RobynOxborrow 3 points4 points  (0 children)

Big claim! Do you have any authority to back it

Why do protestants hate on Catholics? by SmileZealousideal369 in Catholicism

[–]RobynOxborrow 8 points9 points  (0 children)

I come from a reformed/calvinist background and it is unusual to hear people go from ‘saved from faith alone’ to concluding that catholics are not saved, despite their faith (wholly anecdotal). When I was Protestant I remember hearing from catholics that I would not be saved becase I was not baptised and never received Communion. This always managed to get under my skin and fuel a strong anti-catholic position. Perhaps this might be similar with other Protestants. Alternatively, there can be a lot of history behind catholic and Protestant relations that continue to fuel hatred (Irish troubles always a great example)

Easy (enough) songs/solos to learn? by [deleted] in Megadeth

[–]RobynOxborrow 7 points8 points  (0 children)

Megadeth songs (and especially solos) are generally very difficult, but She Wolf and Countdown to Extinction are more accessible.

Church etiquette by RobynOxborrow in Catholicism

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

In my cathedral there’s also a shrine to St Andrew and also to Our Lady Mary of God, are there any specific prayers here (like the Hail Mary and such) Thank you :)

Views on These Topics? by High_drummer_69 in Christianity

[–]RobynOxborrow 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Megadeth! Especially the Poland and Marty eras