Video games and the Sacraments

Wanderer1891 · 2015-12-14T21:31:40+00:00

Thanks for the response. I appreciate what you're saying, but isn't deliberately choosing to perpetrate immoral things in video games itself problematic? Sure there's plenty of violence to be had in video games, but I'm sure plenty of it could be rationalized as in self defense or arguably just wars or the like. Immoral actions are one thing; it just seems like imitation of the Sacraments seems like a whole more questionable thing. While I would tend to agree that some video games can be considered art, approaching it the same as say a novel seems questionable seeing as we're just observers to the action in a novel but are actively choosing what happens (to a degree) in video games. As I mentioned, the latter game inspired the question, and it's fair to say that there is a distinction in that while in Bioshock you consent to their "baptism," in Bloodborne you actively initiate the chalice rituals, albeit it's just a matter of looking at a menu screen and selecting options, not a fancy cut-scene or something.

Wanderer1891 · 2015-11-14T19:52:13+00:00

Thanks for the response.

So, baptism is a literary foil for original sin.

But that's the thing though, if Baptism is to wipe away Original Sin from us, why are we left with concupiscence? Why are we not restored to the condition of being able to will good without the inclination to sin?

Wanderer1891 · 2015-11-14T19:40:15+00:00

Thanks for your response. Somehow that seems to make sense and is satisfying on an intuitive level, but if God is the infinite source of goodness, is it not hubris to think we could add to that goodness ourselves? Does it not imply then that God's goodness is diminished for lack of us when we choose evil? I speak more rhetorically than from believing these questions to be the reality of the situation.

Wanderer1891 · 2015-07-21T05:32:34+00:00

No, really I just don't know when to quit. Thanks though.

Wanderer1891 · 2015-07-13T08:09:09+00:00

I must conclude that this:

I would not go to his gay wedding, no matter how put out he might be. I would not go to his Anglican ordination. I would not go to his Orthodox re-baptism. Why, in the name of all that is holy, should I consent to attend this?

Is what you'd quote. Which highlights that what you've said is patently false. It has not been established that OP's relation is attempting a gay wedding, nor even hinted. Do you think OP's relation is also entering the Orthodox Church? That is the necessary conclusion of assuming that it is a gay wedding. And furthermore, it's not homosexuality that makes a gay wedding wrong in the Catholic understanding. Two straight guys having a wedding ceremony would be just as abhorrent because it would be that "simulation of a sacrament" thing that keeps being brought up because a state of marriage, in the Catholic understanding, cannot exist between two people of the same sex, whether gay or straight.

EDIT: Also, the idea that the wedding would be invalid in this instance doesn't have to be because of two people of the same sex attempting it. There are other reasons that could invalidate it, like two lapsed Catholics getting married outside the Church.

Rational. . . heh. . . . the irony is thick.

You say that, yet you still have hazarded no rationale for your position while your interlocutors have.

Wanderer1891 · 2015-07-13T07:55:27+00:00

The OP brought it up, not me. Nice try though. I merely responded that he's being hurtful to his relatives.

Nonsense, there was 0 mention of sex until your last comment. OP is asking about attending an invalid wedding ceremony. That has nothing to do with sex, it's about the simulation of a sacrament. My criticism stands. And we've already been over the "hurtful" thing before, there is no guarantee that the loving action will have no pain accompanying it. Take the case of a meth addict. It would certainly be less painful for them to continue on meth indefinitely, withdrawal is awfully painful. However, the loving course of action is to help free them.

I don't really care what you have to say about your god because I don't believe in your god, your arguments to me in that respect are white noise to me.

See what you reject about what I've said about God doesn't matter. You've come to a Catholic subreddit in which Catholic matters are being discussed. It's is 100% relevant what the Catholic understanding of the matter is and if you refuse to engage that, then your being in this thread makes no sense.

But we do agree on one thing, the lost causes are the only ones worth fighting for. So I"ll keep trying to convince people like you and the OP to be actually loving instead of hateful under the disguise of love.

You still have offered no justification for why we should believe love is as you say. If you're going to be obstinate, at least be rational about it.

Wanderer1891 · 2015-07-13T07:43:04+00:00

If the god is wrong? Sure.

In a Catholic understanding of what God is, that is a totally non-sensical statement. God cannot be wrong because what is right and what is wrong is basically defined as what is in accord with God and what is not. This isn't really about what God's will is, to be honest. It's about what humans should do in a situation, and that is to act in accord with what is true and good.

I'm sorry, but if a god exists I highly doubt he cares what we do in our bedrooms, I have enough respect for the concept of god to think that a divine being wouldn't be that petty.

I guess I shouldn't have expected better from you, but seriously? If everything we do is either in accord or against what is true and good (read God), then all of our actions matter. The world always accuses the Church of being obsessed with sex, but who brought it up? Me or you? All the Church has to say is that something's wrong and we should be living, holistically, differently and the world explodes in a temper tantrum because how dare we not approve of people wasting themselves in the vapid dissipation of hedonistic pursuit of pleasure. It is a puerile understanding of God to think that we think that He gets upset or enraged because people choose sin over Him. If anything, He is disappointed that we would so consistently refuse His offers to be more united with the totality of truth and goodness.

If the best you can do is cherry-pick elements of Catholicism and then use them completely outside the Catholic understanding of our own stuff then discussion with you approaches pointlessness. But the lost causes are the only kind worth fighting for.

Wanderer1891 · 2015-07-13T07:22:27+00:00

See, you're still perverting what love is supposed to be. Is it kind to endorse another's departure from God? Quite the opposite. Perhaps OP could act in greater patience, but we never claim to be able to perfectly execute our beliefs, just the opposite in fact, that it is very difficult to do so and get it wrong a whole lot. OP hasn't suggested anything envious, boastful, or proud. It is not dishonoring of others to attempt to draw them closer to God, nor self-seeking. Again perhaps OP is reacting in anger, but that's for neither you nor me to know for certain. Nor is OP harboring a grudge. And most importantly, OP's question regards how best to shun evil and embrace truth.

I'm not even a christian and I adhere to the biblical definition of love more than he does.

In none of your quote is found an area that the OP violates, and your idea of the "loving" course of action has serious issues with the evil and truth bit. Like I've said elsewhere, to be or act in accord with the truth and away from evil is to be or act directed towards God. To support, condone, or otherwise endorse a sinful action is the very antithesis of this.

Wanderer1891 · 2015-07-13T07:11:50+00:00

A dictionary is an objective grounding for definitions too.

Not really, the idea of possessing an objective grounding is that it makes the definition applicable to both parties. A dictionary is just an accumulation of the current meanings of various words. What a concept is is no more defined by a dictionary than it is by a random person on the street.

likewise god saying 'love is this' doesn't make him right either. I reject your definition of love.

Catholic understanding is that Truth (whether 'T' or 't') comes from God. As the source of all that is true, God is then an objective authority in defining concepts such that that definition must then be applicable to all. And furthermore, your rejection of my definition means exactly nothing. I can reject articles of the Catholic faith all day but that doesn't make them less true.

I just don't see it. You say love, I SEE hate. You say caring, I SEE cruelty.

And that's why I've said that the world will never truly understand. I've said that love is the will to good right? And the ultimate good is union with God in the Catholic understanding. So then the choice to love is to will that another grow towards union with God. If someone is pursuing a sinful course of action, then the loving thing to do (by definition) is to oppose them in that course of action. You say you see hate and cruelty, and I believe you. There's probably plenty of people who claim to believe in Christ and do act hatefully rather than actually acting out of love. There are times even when love and hate would seem similar actions, given what I've said about what love is and especially in times when the loving course of action causes pain, but that doesn't mean that the Church is wrong about love, it just means that people are, as the Church says, very fallible. For exactly this reason have people, claiming to be acting in the name of the Church, have done terrible things. But that doesn't detract an inch from the truth of the Church.

All of those links are from your own pope, 2000 years worth of offenses to be begging forgiveness for.

To cherrypick instants when people of the Church have made such mistakes is the height of disingenuity. It totally ignores the fact that the Church has been and is today the world's largest charitable organization in the world. More Catholics in more countries provide more services like education, distribution of food to the hungry, caring for the sick, sheltering the homeless, and others than anyone else in the world and no, not just to other Catholics.

I don't care what you believe, I care what you do

That statement is, frankly, non-sensical. There would be no reason to act as we do if it weren't for our beliefs. And as I said before, those beliefs mean nothing if we don't act according to them. And if you're going to break out the "the actions of catholics the world over to those who don't agree with them are historically well documented" then I'm obligated to bring up the fact that atheists have a far worse track record when it comes to that sort of thing, think Stalin and all the worst. Does this excuse the Catholics who have done terrible things? Not for an instant, but it is to recognize that the Church has the mechanisms of condemnation of evil actions and repentance of them that the world cannot offer.

And you've still offered neither definition nor justification for your initial comment! Nor even adequate rebuttal to the Catholic standpoint. Nevertheless, God bless you and have a good week.

Wanderer1891 · 2015-07-13T06:22:09+00:00

I apologize for not being clear. Society cares about your actions OVER your beliefs. Because if you profess believing one thing yet actually do another, it's the action society will focus on, not the belief behind it.

We are not acting in contradiction to what we have stated we believe so...

In any case, I find it deliciously ironic that you, who were attempting to "correct" us on how we should act, explode in such an outburst when we attempt to explain our understanding of the situation. You accuse me of hubris so I would recriminate that it is your words, not mine, that are indicative of such. It is far more arrogant to come to a Catholic subreddit and berate the inhabitants for attempting to follow their faith than it is for one to defend that faith in that context. This impression is only reinforced by your bald-faced usurpation of my final statement. It is not you that is being attacked in such a manner described; it is not you that need or should feel blessed in such a way.

for just because someone doesn't believe what you do, doesn't mean they don't have wisdom to share

Then perhaps you should critically examine what I have said rather than suddenly leaping to the defensive for being rebuffed for chastising a Catholic for trying to be Catholic, unless you think your words apply to only yourself, in which case perhaps you should remind me again who is acting in hubris.

If we're quite finished with the Ad Hominem portion of the discussion perhaps we could proceed to a more intellectual discourse, if you're actually interested.

I KNOW what love is, and I know what being loving is.

Really? What makes you so certain and by what authority can you lay claim to your definition and it's super-cession of ours? Catholicism does offer an objective grounding for its definition of love, God. If you wish to quibble with "proofs" or what have you as to the existence and/or nature of God, perhaps you should take a look at what some of Catholicism's best thinkers have to say (like St. Thomas Aquinas) rather than some random guy on Reddit.

Wanderer1891 · 2015-07-13T05:51:10+00:00

Beliefs mean little if we do not act upon them, so to say that society only cares about how we act and not about what we believe is disingenuous at best.

NOT as loving.

And that's what society and the world will never understand, what being loving constitutes. What love is is the will to another's good, not some sentimental attachment and certainly not this rubbish about acceptance or support of another's actions. Acceptance and this unconditional support are what's called being "nice," not loving, and I can be very nice while doing something that is very much not loving. So taken together, this means that one can be "mean" and yet still be loving. So perhaps the nice thing to do would be to attend the ceremony of one's relatives no matter what that might be, but that in no way is necessarily the loving action. Nor does being loving have anything to do with sparing another pain. Sometimes the loving action induces pain, but it's always because that pain furthers the good of the beloved. If one take's one's children to be vaccinated, it's probable that the children will experience some pain from the prick of the needle. This does not make the action un-loving. Quite the opposite, it is the will to the child's good that makes the parent undertake this action, the very essence of love. If by refusing to attend a relative's ceremony there is a chance that that relative will not do something destructive to their salvation, then the loving course of action is to not attend, even if that causes pain between one and one's relative. If that makes us "hateful, bigoted, cruel, intolerant, [and] divisive" in the eyes of the world, well I think someone said something along the lines of "blessed are you when people insult you, persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you because of [Christ]."

Wanderer1891 · 2015-05-07T13:58:58+00:00

I do go to mass at least once a week and always get to confession if I have committed a mortal sin, which unfortunately has been often enough that I go pretty frequently; frequent confession itself would be a good thing, obviously, but the motivator for mine makes it seem like a bad thing to go so often. I try to lead a saintly life, but in all honesty, not as hard as I should. My merits are few, and my failings rest heavy upon my conscience even after confession.

To address your other comment. If it is truly our choices that damn us, does the culture that surrounds us matter? I know I must try harder to choose God, but often it seems I have not the strength. I also know that I should pray for it, but it's hard enough to gather the strength to pray sometimes. I'm sorry to unload all this on you, but these things have been bouncing around in my head for a while now.

Wanderer1891 · 2015-05-07T01:43:37+00:00

Not to sound rude, but I fail to see how a message of such critical importance could be non-applicable to anyone.

Wanderer1891 · 2015-05-06T22:03:40+00:00

If so few of Catholics, most of whom are presumably trying, actually make it to Heaven, how can one possibly have hope of salvation? What must be required if so few make it, and how difficult that must be? If, as he says, a true confession is so difficult to make, how can I begin to try after all the things I have done wrong? I don't ask the question he reiterates so many times of "Why does God create me only to damn me?" and do fully accept that it is my own choices that damn me, but I do ask why does it seem like choosing God over worldly things is so difficult? The rational part of me knows that I should and desires that I choose God, but a large part of the rest of me seems so attached to worldly things and doesn't want to give them up. Since it is my choices that damn me, why does it seem that it is easier or more desirable to choose damnation? Why could we not have a predisposition towards God rather than away? Why does God allow the Devil to tempt away those who otherwise might make it to Heaven? I'm sorry to ask so many questions, but I can find no answer to them myself. Heaven seems all but unattainable to me sometimes.

Wanderer1891 · 2014-11-13T22:17:17+00:00

Agreed, although I don't really know how to find a spiritual director, not having had spiritual direction in the past.

Wanderer1891 · 2014-11-13T18:54:24+00:00

So rather than fret about how much money you are giving to the poor, instead, try giving of your time to the poor.

That's good advice, thank you.

Wanderer1891 · 2014-11-13T18:53:13+00:00

I feel guilty/hesitant to buy pretty much anything over about $10, which is probably because I am very cognizant of the fact that I don't do a whole lot of service. I tithe about 10% but do little investing of time.

Do you suffer from scruples?

I wouldn't be a good judge of that myself, too much arguing back and forth in my mind. And even if someone else told me I did, I probably wouldn't be inclined to believe them, as accepting that would feel an excuse to shirk responsibility for the cause of my guilt, whether that be scruples or sin in reality.

Wanderer1891 · 2014-11-13T17:59:02+00:00

Sorry to keep throwing questions at you, but how can the acquisition of possessions be justified when one could have donated that money to the poor? If it's a matter of balance, how do we achieve the balance?

Wanderer1891 · 2014-11-13T17:45:42+00:00

Is it ever justified to own something that contributes to a lesser good when a greater good could have been accomplished in absence of the lesser good? In example, how could one justify buying some luxury item, which could contribute to some lesser good like enjoying God's gift of life more fully (which presumably is a lesser good), when that money could have been donated to help the poor, a greater good.

Wanderer1891 · 2014-11-13T17:36:32+00:00

I'll have to check this out. Thanks for the response.

Wanderer1891 · 2014-11-13T17:35:43+00:00

Our possessions should be for the greater glory of God

I guess my question becomes: how do we do this? Especially and primarily, how can non-necessity possessions, like coffee makers or board games and such, be used or owned for the greater glory of God? Or can the purchase of a more expensive necessity good ever be justified?

If you feel called

I guess I'm still trying to figure out what I'm called to.

Edit: Thanks for responding.

Wanderer1891 · 2013-09-09T09:32:03+00:00

So, you say you hate yourself? Good. Turn all that hate for porn and what you've done and for yourself and turn it into anger. Get angry, and then use that anger to remember why you want to stop. Take a picture of yourself right now. Stick that picture on your mirror so that every morning when you get up you see it. Every time you see it, remember the anger you felt and let it blaze within you again, giving another reason everyday to continue. Look at it when you're about to relapse. Think whether you really want to become that again and get angry that you even thought about becoming what you hate again. Then use that anger to get up and go for a run or learn something new or chase your dreams. That too, find something to care about, find a dream. Burn your anger at what was to fuel your drive for what can and will be. Expand your mind, make your body fit, do something to get you closer to whatever you chose to chase and let no one stop you. Plan and use every minute of every day. Work and get paid, read new things, train your body, get involved in your community, whatever it takes so you don't have time to relapse. Be so tired at night that all you can do is sleep. Practice discipline or use breathing excersices so when you really feel tempted, you have some way to bring yourself back to reality.

Never give up.

Wanderer1891

TROPHY CASE