Religious debate, Part I

I have a good friend and fraternity brother who moved to Ottawa after he graduated from engineering physics at the U of A.  Smart as a whip and always a pleasure to debate on certain issues.  I bemoan the fact that he's so far away and we can't 'dish it old school' face to face.

Jared was one of the few guys in the fraternity with whom I could really sit down and enjoy a heart to heart, all too infrequently.  His pedantry and intellectual hubris was tempered by an endearing naivete to which I could readily relate.

A couple weeks ago, he took some exception to a post I made about the comments that two Canadian cardinals gave in reference to the new pope's reputation as a hard line task master.  This then led to a growing string of religious Email banter which he has given me permission to reproduce here.

I wanted to do so since we both take such opposing stances and have no hope in Heck of subverting the other's viewpoint, but going through the motions is quite enjoyable.  It is incredibly important to make an effort to see where lie the perspectives of others from atop your own mountain.

It's gotten quite lengthy, and I don't think we're done yet, so I'll be adding stuff here in parts to keep it readable, if you're so inclined.  And if you feel like chiming in, there are plenty of chinks in the armour of our debate to exploit.

My favourite quote from Jared so far came from the fact that we've both had to use Google to look up words the other has used in our volleys.  'Cause, you know, big words give your argument more weight.  (I had to look up 'soteriology' and he had to look up 'asomatous'.) 

He said, "Ah Google - how infinately smaller would be my store of semi-useless knowledge were it not for Google!"

Here's the first salvo:

Hey Simon,

The idea that the world is fallen and needs to change has stood at the core of church doctrine for going on two millennia now. Surely you weren't expecting the new pope to be other than Catholic. This is the sort of silliness I expect from the press but from you, Simon?

 

The pope is not the supreme chancellor of the church - and has no more authority to change church doctrine on female priests or homosexuality than he does to renounce, for instance, belief in the resurrection of Christ. Contraception is somewhat more debatable, never being clearly spelled out in scripture, though having read the justification given by the church for it's position, I find myself feeling more and more sympathetic. It rests upon a radically different understanding of the purpose and meaning of sexual union than that commonly held within modern western culture. (And no, it's not purely procreative - see "Theology of the Body" by none other than JPII) And that's really what it's all about now isn't it. The pope dissents from the great cry of the modern, liberated man: "What right do you have stand in the way of my immediate sexual gratification??!!!"

 

As a good Presbyterian it should be me looking with a jaundiced eye upon the heretical institution of the papacy, but people who believe in something beyond pragmatism and public opinion polls are far to rare in public life. I much prefer the pope, who will defend what he believes to be true, to the masses of the enlightened 'liberals' who demand absolute fealty to a position of radical scepticism as pertains to the knowability of Truth and then furiosly denounce with epithets like 'hard-line' and 'rottweiler' all who would demur.

 

Were it not for my own doctrinaire positions on soteriology, ecclesiology, and my discomfort with marian devotion, I might myself be severely tempted to 'cross the Tiber' as it were.

 

Semper,

Jared

---

Hey Jared,

 

Good to hear from you again.  And of course I have to respond to a couple of your points.

 

By now, you should come to expect a rather greater degree of silliness from me.  There is a tragic paucity of that sweet balm in the world today and I am doing my best to fill more than my share.  If it comes at the expense of organised religion, well then all the better.

 

You will get absolutely no dissent at all from me in that the world has fallen; and it's not making all that much effort to get back up.  (It's never even really been fully erect yet.)  We, all of us, have a great long way to travel.  I simply do not think that the Roman Catholic Church is the best shepherd out there for the daunting task. No religion is; by the very tenets that make them what they are.  In fact, I think that the only shepherd out there for any one of us is simply our own self.  The instant I, or anyone else, starts to look outside one's self for guidance, I've already lost the way.  Go within or you go without.  That's just me and I don't intend on foisting that on anyone else.

 

(The image of Benedict as Supreme Chancellor was just a funny image more than any serious comparison; at least from my perspective.)

 

Which brings to mind your comment on the great cry of the modern, liberated man.  Frankly, what the heck right does the pope have to stand in the way of anyone's sexual gratification?  I've never read the church's justification for it's current position on contraception (that's an almost Freudian phrase there) nor Theology of the Body; and have no current intentions to do so.  But any organisation which would dare to attempt to dictate to its flock an appropriate means of physical congress, or which improprieties are to be avoided, ought to have its collective head smacked for sheer presumptuousness.  And the flock doubly so for bleating and following suit.

 

I do like your point about the allegedly 'enlightened' liberals holding to positions of radical skepticism regarding the knowability of Truth.  Though I would argue that they do not so much demand fealty of others to that same position as they do sneer at and look down upon those who demur.  And that can be a very fine line.  Denouncement and castigation can quickly follow.  Were I to broadcast my own views from on high, I would be similarly mocked by many of those same 'enlightened' folk for holding to a position that cannot be substantiated.  (I shan't expound this instant.)  I liken the situation to that of a confrontation between Commander Lock and Morpheus in the last Matrix movie.  Lock confronted Morpheus with the statement that he did not hold with the other's beliefs.  Morpheus simply responded with, "My beliefs do not require you to."

 

And you know, our positions on soteriology are probably not all that different.  I firmly believe that He is the Way and the Life and that all who follow Him will find eternal salvation.  I also think that the promised salvation is completely unavoidable, even if such is your intention.  The hard part is finding it here on Earth rather than in that great journey after we shuffle off our mortal coil and all become 'ex-parrots'.  (There really is a Python quote for any occasion.)  JC seemed to have done it.  And, as heretical as it sounds, I consider myself no less God's Son than He was.  JC just had it more together than I do; or ever will in this lifetime.  That whole 'only begotten son' thing is biblical hooey from where I stand.  (So then, perhaps the purported similarity in regards to our soteriological positions is rather more superficial, not going past the strictly ecclesiological.) Phew!  Say that ten times real fast!

 

And just to be antagonistic, I may as well share the fact that one of my favourite oxymorons is 'religious dogma'.  Right up there with 'eschew obfuscation' and 'Abba's Greatest Hits'.

 

Hope Ontario's treating you well, by the way.  The Fraser clan is heading out that way for the latter half of May.  If you, by any chance, are planning to be in the Kitchener-Waterloo area, or Smiths Falls, I'd love to debate over a pint sometime.  And alway enjoy our Email exchanges.

 

Hugs and kisses,

Si.

Comments

[Paula]

Speaking of 'only begotten son' (OK, that's pushing a segue), happy birthday to Declan! Wishing the Fraser family a wonderful day...

Paula
(May the fourth be with me also as I write my exam tonight)

[Penny]

I do hope you will continue to share this debate, if only to see more Python quotes. I am convinced that one can find solace and meaning in their lives if only they accept that Monty Python is The One True Way...amen..;) Penny

[Simon]

There is definitely more of the debate coming. Not too sure about further Python quotes though...