Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 11:22 PM Apr 2012

Something revolutionary new in religion

When any institution gets stuck in its own dogma, style and government, and refuses to understand that change and growth are endemic to culture, it is in serious trouble. Any wider notion of evolution posits that change and growth are in themseves a fact of existence. Few successful political strategies suggest that if we only go back or concretize the status quo, all will be well. When General Electric said, “progress is our most important product,” the American people said, “Yes!”

What is true of almost everything else, is also true of religious institutions. Those here who insist that there is no such thing as a dynamic modern religious movement, and who want to believe that all religious thought must be dated sometime back, just hope for a moribund form of faith they can more easily attack.

Just last week we saw a biting example of this truth. The Vatican has just unleashed a vigorous attack on its growing progressive edge. Once the nuns got out of their black and white habits and entered the modern world, they discovered that a religious enterprise mired in the 16th century was hopelessly out of date. Up they came from the bowels of a church that never realized that the feminist movement is real, that sex is not universally evil and that a group of old celibate men did not have the last word about life.

For a long time the Vatican has been able to control creative thought through heavy-handed juridical power. What they had not countenanced, however, was the advent of women who had come into their own and were no longer subject to an outmoded patriarchy.

For decades Catholic religious women have been abandoning their orders and the rule of the church. Now within the church the revolt is in full bloom. While the Vatican may now attack the orders in hope that those they appointed as their heads will bring their groups back into proper order, it is a losing battle. Once the Genii is out of the bottle, no amount of old-time pressure can stuff it back.

Women have unleashed something vibrant in a deadly hierarchy. Here is a single contemporary example of what is happening throughout Christianity. There are two groups which are resisting the developments. One is the established religious authorities. The second is those non-theists who are threatened by anything new in religion they cannot put down. They both come out in the same unfortunate place.

59 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Something revolutionary new in religion (Original Post) Thats my opinion Apr 2012 OP
You are correct. They survived the Jesuits, forgave Galileo, Warpy Apr 2012 #1
This is not new. It is not revolutionary. It's been seen for centuries. darkstar3 Apr 2012 #2
Indeed. Ask the Berrigans. Or the liberation theology movement. Or Dorothy Day. Warren Stupidity Apr 2012 #9
I'm curious as to why you don't even want to see what the nuns are saying? Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #47
I said nothing about the nuns. darkstar3 Apr 2012 #50
The Difference Might be That the Dissidents are Members of the Clergy or Religious Orders On the Road Apr 2012 #3
Up until the last paragraph, I'm on board with you. Then you get into a slightly dimbear Apr 2012 #4
It is not that there are those who don't want to see the nuns reforming the church, Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #40
Except that nuns are NOT reforming the church. Never have and never will. skepticscott Apr 2012 #42
Your second to last sentence, I find very offensive Angry Dragon Apr 2012 #5
Let me deal here with several responses. Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #15
It seems to me this is different from your earlier claims muriel_volestrangler Apr 2012 #16
That's hitting the nail on the head. darkstar3 Apr 2012 #22
Living in a community with several nuns, former nuns and former Catholic priests, Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #41
Perhaps the reaction you get is due to you poisoning the well? trotsky Apr 2012 #17
Big time +1. (nt) eqfan592 Apr 2012 #21
"What was your reason for including it?" darkstar3 Apr 2012 #23
As would I EvolveOrConvolve Apr 2012 #26
What I would like to see are links to back up things you state Angry Dragon Apr 2012 #20
That is what I mean.There is no support here, Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #27
Wow, really? trotsky Apr 2012 #43
I have no disrespect for theism Angry Dragon Apr 2012 #55
I have never seen any link in any of your posts Angry Dragon Apr 2012 #57
If you read through these posts, can you understand what I was talking about? Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #34
Non-theists "threatened" by religion? xfundy Apr 2012 #6
I have just posted an alternative which you ignore. Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #32
I'm getting awfully sick and tired of you referring darkstar3 Apr 2012 #52
I wonder why it's so important to you, mr blur Apr 2012 #7
Apparently we are in league with the pope. Warren Stupidity Apr 2012 #10
Damn, they found out! On to Plan B: the Mormons. nt mr blur Apr 2012 #11
Does this mean that the Catholic church will stop trying to tell non-Catholics how to live? n/t Fumesucker Apr 2012 #8
Of course not. Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #28
There you go again, taking one event and saying it's happening "all over." darkstar3 Apr 2012 #31
One event? Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #48
Have you seen how the lists you've posted elsewhere constitute a drop in the ocean? darkstar3 Apr 2012 #51
I don't like others telling me how to live based on their particular brand of what is to me delusion Fumesucker Apr 2012 #39
Why on earth would ANY "non-theist" want to "put down" an effort to further... trotsky Apr 2012 #12
I do not understand edhopper Apr 2012 #13
What is new in religion "that cannot be put down?" immoderate Apr 2012 #14
Why is it that you post these somewhat insightful posts only to poison them with falsities... Humanist_Activist Apr 2012 #18
Just say how you celebrate what is happening, and I'll take you seriously. nt Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #29
I celebrate the weakening of the power and influence of the Catholic Church... Humanist_Activist Apr 2012 #36
Revolutionary as it ever was... onager Apr 2012 #19
Twain makes me proud to have been born in Missouri. darkstar3 Apr 2012 #24
Please tell us why that Twain post--which is delightful and true--- Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #30
Witches, tama Apr 2012 #37
You've really displayed a confounding lack of understanding of atheism and non-believers. TransitJohn Apr 2012 #25
This is not the"atheists" group. Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #33
And if you want to find people who won't disagree with you, try a group. darkstar3 Apr 2012 #35
Might you agree that there is a difference Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #45
It's not the "agree with me about religion" group either...it's not a group at all TransitJohn Apr 2012 #44
If it is not a group, what is it? If you look under "religion" you will find the word "group" Thats my opinion Apr 2012 #46
I don't care that they winnowed down the forums on DU3...it's still the Religion Forum TransitJohn Apr 2012 #53
Actually, it *is* a Group. Says so right at the top. mr blur Apr 2012 #49
I don't care that they winnowed down the forums on DU3...it's still the Religion Forum TransitJohn Apr 2012 #54
You are correct. trotsky Apr 2012 #58
Plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose. (sans texte) dimbear Apr 2012 #38
Holy fuck, you must love to fight. That last sentence ruins your whole post, and is so not true. Evoman Apr 2012 #56
Nice post. prefunk Apr 2012 #59

Warpy

(111,267 posts)
1. You are correct. They survived the Jesuits, forgave Galileo,
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 11:27 PM
Apr 2012

and even managed to swallow their bile and accept evolution and modern scientific thought on the origin of the universe, as long as the theories were incomplete enough for them to use god as their first cause.

However, the viciousness they harbor toward the female half of the human race knows no bounds. This isn't the first time they've attacked female religious orders for being too progressive and it won't be the last. The hierarchy wants them swathed in Mediaeval clothing and cloistered, not out in the world and being Christlike.

And they wonder why I stomped off in disgust at the age of ten.

darkstar3

(8,763 posts)
2. This is not new. It is not revolutionary. It's been seen for centuries.
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 11:35 PM
Apr 2012

The Catholic Church has always dealt with those who disagree, in small or large groups, with their dogma. When those revolts are successful, they are called schisms. When they fail, they are called heresies.

Either way, they haven't changed the Church too much in the past. Such is the job of such councils as the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

I don't know where you got your rose colored glasses, but they are seriously handicapping your view of history.

darkstar3

(8,763 posts)
50. I said nothing about the nuns.
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 08:01 PM
Apr 2012

What I said was that your characterization of their actions is laughably off-base. There is nothing new or revolutionary about what is going on here.

I don't feel threatened at all, by this or by you, but clearly you feel threatened by something.

On the Road

(20,783 posts)
3. The Difference Might be That the Dissidents are Members of the Clergy or Religious Orders
Sun Apr 22, 2012, 11:40 PM
Apr 2012

Most lay Catholics, at least in America, couldn't give a rat's ass what the pope says or what the official position of the church is.

dimbear

(6,271 posts)
4. Up until the last paragraph, I'm on board with you. Then you get into a slightly
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 01:19 AM
Apr 2012

fantastic place, suspecting a league of nontheists who don't want to see nuns reform the Catholic church. Need to see more evidence of that one. Or even any evidence of that one.

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
40. It is not that there are those who don't want to see the nuns reforming the church,
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 05:26 AM
Apr 2012

but who just do not believe it is happening--since all religion is bad. Every time I have posted something positive about the church, that is the responses I get. Just read them here.

 

skepticscott

(13,029 posts)
42. Except that nuns are NOT reforming the church. Never have and never will.
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 05:52 AM
Apr 2012

Not in any way you have shown here, and not in any way that matters. They're getting their habits in a twist and expressing dismay in the media, neither of which have any influence on anything of significance to the redhat club.

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
15. Let me deal here with several responses.
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 10:15 AM
Apr 2012

Every time I suggest that there are new progressive forces in religion, I get a host of negative responses, asking me prove it, claiming it doesn't exist, asking for five more proofs after I have provided a long positing, claiming it is so small it doesn't matter, accusing me of making up the whole thing, claiming that I am the only own who holds such stuff etc. etc. etc. And you are offended?

I should think that all the progressive religious evidences that have been posted would receive at least some solid support, not because people believe in the theology behind them--nobody expects that--but because there is a side of modern religion that holds the same social ethic many other progressives do.. Instead these evidences get-----. Do you want a list of those responses?

in this string just see if there is any affirming word in 1,2 3,8,13, 14

muriel_volestrangler

(101,321 posts)
16. It seems to me this is different from your earlier claims
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 12:26 PM
Apr 2012

You had been talking about how theology had changed, and that belief in miracles, answers to prayers, virgin births and so on were old-fashioned and on their way out; and that it didn't matter any more if Jesus was actually resurrected or not. And that still seems to be the exception, rather than the rule, to me - Spong does not have many followers.

This is about how socially conservative sections of the Roman Catholic church are. The nuns aren't. But that doesn't mean they don't believe in the miracles of the New Testament.

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
41. Living in a community with several nuns, former nuns and former Catholic priests,
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 05:34 AM
Apr 2012

it is clear that the two things go together. Once the juridical power of the church is questioned, so are the doctrines. You may realize that the Vatican office that came down on the nuns is the old Inquisition, the protector of the doctrines of the faith. This is not at all a separate issue.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
17. Perhaps the reaction you get is due to you poisoning the well?
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 01:22 PM
Apr 2012

Look at the phrase that multiple people were offended by. What was your reason for including it? It was unnecessary and false. So why not leave it off, leave off all your snide remarks and back-handed attacks on non-belief, and see how people react?

EvolveOrConvolve

(6,452 posts)
26. As would I
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 11:07 PM
Apr 2012

Trying to blame "non-theists" for the problems faced by progressive elements in the Catholic church is laughable.

TMO isn't going to provide a decent answer, but I have a pretty good idea why he included it. Par for the course...

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
27. That is what I mean.There is no support here,
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 11:34 PM
Apr 2012

only ridicule and a demand for proof that anything progressive is happening in religion. It is as if some of who just don't accept anything progressive in religion, because it hurts your disrespect for all theism.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
43. Wow, really?
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 07:00 AM
Apr 2012

Someone asks you for a link and you think that's an unreasonable demand for proof?

And then you launch right into attacking again. Amazing.

Angry Dragon

(36,693 posts)
55. I have no disrespect for theism
Wed Apr 25, 2012, 12:51 AM
Apr 2012

Where I have my problems is that the leaders of some religions are so concerned in protecting their church that they forget that if they truly believe in their god their church needs no one to stand up for it.

The leaders of churches make the rules and I see for the most part none of any major churches turning progressive.
All I am asking is for you to show me with facts and links where this progression is.
You are free to have any opinion you desire but when you hold things out there as fact then you need to show the facts.
And what does it really mean when you state that religion is turning progressive??
The New Testament preached love for everyone and if you are saying that is the new progressive stance then all that really means is that some religions are starting at a place 2100 years old.

Angry Dragon

(36,693 posts)
57. I have never seen any link in any of your posts
Wed Apr 25, 2012, 01:05 AM
Apr 2012

to back up your statements.

And what are the new progressive??
Do they state that all the universe is connected and we need to stop and find our way in the universe??
Do they state that man is not the ruler of the universe??
Do they state that man is just a small speck in the universe and man's passing would not change much??

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
34. If you read through these posts, can you understand what I was talking about?
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 12:01 AM
Apr 2012

You mostly seem like a resasonable person.

xfundy

(5,105 posts)
6. Non-theists "threatened" by religion?
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 02:28 AM
Apr 2012

Only when the fundamentalists of those religions have stolen enough power and brainwashed their followers into bloodthirsty hate.

BEWARE OF GOD.

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
32. I have just posted an alternative which you ignore.
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 11:53 PM
Apr 2012

Why is it impossible to affirm the progressive forces in religion?
Does it really upset your prejudices that much?

darkstar3

(8,763 posts)
52. I'm getting awfully sick and tired of you referring
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 08:12 PM
Apr 2012

to everyone on this board who disagrees with you as "prejudiced". It's incorrect, it's against the TOS, and it's bad form. It's also exactly the same tactic as right-wing assholes using the phrase "if you don't...then you hate America."

 

mr blur

(7,753 posts)
7. I wonder why it's so important to you,
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 05:29 AM
Apr 2012

to insist that non-theists are threatened in some way by your wonderful, much-trumpeted "new" religion? Does it never occur to you that, far from being worried by "progressive" theology, we just don't care?

Your paranoia and insecurity are quite revealing; could it be that it's not us you're trying to convince, but yourself?

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
28. Of course not.
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 11:40 PM
Apr 2012

But what keeps you from celebrating what is breaking out all over the religious world? Don't you want what is happening? Does that threaten you?

darkstar3

(8,763 posts)
31. There you go again, taking one event and saying it's happening "all over."
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 11:51 PM
Apr 2012

Will you ever get tired of your false generalizations?

darkstar3

(8,763 posts)
51. Have you seen how the lists you've posted elsewhere constitute a drop in the ocean?
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 08:06 PM
Apr 2012

Are you paying attention at all to the current trends regarding religion and politics? Here's a news flash: They aren't following your philosophy. Quite the opposite, in fact. As the world becomes more secular, the backlash we see from American Christians becomes more pronounced.

You're fighting an uphill battle against an avalanche, and all the people you want recognition from have already walked away from the mountain.

Fumesucker

(45,851 posts)
39. I don't like others telling me how to live based on their particular brand of what is to me delusion
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 05:23 AM
Apr 2012

Just because the delusion changes in a minor way doesn't mean I'm suddenly going to like them telling me how to live and trying to get laws passed to enforce their particular mode of delusion to ensure that I have to live according to their wishes.

If you look at my profile you'll see that I've opted out of DU juries, I have no desire to censor the words of others but it's clear to me after reading on H&M for a while that there are a good many who positively relish the though of being able to silence others.

Those who relish being able to silence others just seem to naturally end up in control, it never really changes.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
12. Why on earth would ANY "non-theist" want to "put down" an effort to further...
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 09:45 AM
Apr 2012

secularize an archaic, non-progressive religion?

More importantly, why do you feel the need to slam non-theists with such a statement?

 

Humanist_Activist

(7,670 posts)
18. Why is it that you post these somewhat insightful posts only to poison them with falsities...
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 01:38 PM
Apr 2012

about non-theists?

 

Humanist_Activist

(7,670 posts)
36. I celebrate the weakening of the power and influence of the Catholic Church...
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 01:32 AM
Apr 2012

I think your analysis is flawed, its possible the nuns will be labeled schismatic if they don't comply, and a mass excommunication, and subsequent bolting from the church will take place as the organization is reorganized, more or less.

onager

(9,356 posts)
19. Revolutionary as it ever was...
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 02:06 PM
Apr 2012

As Mark Twain observed about the vibrant changes in Xianity more than a hundred years ago...

The methods of the priest and the parson have been very curious, their history is very entertaining.

In all the ages the Roman Church has owned slaves, bought and sold slaves, authorized and encouraged her children to trade in them. Long after some Christian peoples had freed their slaves the Church still held on to hers...

Yet now at last, in our immediate day, we hear a Pope saying slave trading is wrong, and we see him sending an expedition to Africa to stop it.

The texts remain: it is the practice that has changed. Why? Because the world has corrected the Bible. The Church never corrects it; and also never fails to drop in at the tail of the procession - and take the credit of the correction...

During many ages there were witches. The Bible said so. The Bible commanded that they should not be allowed to live.

Therefore the Church, after doing its duty in but a lazy and indolent way for eight hundred years, gathered up its halters, thumbscrews, and firebrands, and set about its holy work in earnest...

Then it was discovered that there was no such thing as witches, and never had been. One does not know whether to laugh or to cry.

Who discovered that there was no such thing as a witch - the priest, the parson? No, these never discover anything...

There are no witches. The witch text remains; only the practice has changed. Hell fire is gone, but the text remains. Infant damnation is gone, but the text remains. More than two hundred death penalties are gone from the law books, but the texts that authorized them remain...

It does certainly seem to suggest that if man continues in the direction of enlightenment, his religious practice may, in the end, attain some semblance of human decency.


darkstar3

(8,763 posts)
24. Twain makes me proud to have been born in Missouri.
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 09:01 PM
Apr 2012

There are many people who sometimes damage that pride, but reading Twain always brings it back.

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
30. Please tell us why that Twain post--which is delightful and true---
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 11:48 PM
Apr 2012

has anything to say about the revolt of the sisters, which is the subject of the post?

TransitJohn

(6,932 posts)
25. You've really displayed a confounding lack of understanding of atheism and non-believers.
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 10:18 PM
Apr 2012

We just don't give a shit about what hokey woo you want to subscribe to as long as you quit bothering us with it. It really is that simple.

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
33. This is not the"atheists" group.
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 11:59 PM
Apr 2012

If you don't want to to be bothered with what you call "hokey woo," then quit here.

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
45. Might you agree that there is a difference
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 01:40 PM
Apr 2012

between not agreeing with something. and not wanting to be bothered with it because it is hooky woo?

TransitJohn

(6,932 posts)
44. It's not the "agree with me about religion" group either...it's not a group at all
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 07:03 AM
Apr 2012

and is open to all opinions. You really don't get that yet?

Thats my opinion

(2,001 posts)
46. If it is not a group, what is it? If you look under "religion" you will find the word "group"
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 01:44 PM
Apr 2012

NOBODY says posters have to agree with anything. But when someone tells us not to bother them even posting what they find "hookey woo," that is a write off, not a disagreement.

TransitJohn

(6,932 posts)
53. I don't care that they winnowed down the forums on DU3...it's still the Religion Forum
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 10:54 PM
Apr 2012

and serves the same purpose.

 

mr blur

(7,753 posts)
49. Actually, it *is* a Group. Says so right at the top.
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 04:19 PM
Apr 2012

But you're right, it's not the "agree with me about religion" group.

TransitJohn

(6,932 posts)
54. I don't care that they winnowed down the forums on DU3...it's still the Religion Forum
Tue Apr 24, 2012, 10:54 PM
Apr 2012

and serves the same purpose.

trotsky

(49,533 posts)
58. You are correct.
Wed Apr 25, 2012, 08:22 AM
Apr 2012

Everything's a group now. Religion just isn't a "safe haven" group - differing opinions are allowed here.

Evoman

(8,040 posts)
56. Holy fuck, you must love to fight. That last sentence ruins your whole post, and is so not true.
Wed Apr 25, 2012, 01:00 AM
Apr 2012

Hell, I love new stuff in religion. Nothing gets me hotter than when the church is pulled out of it's regressive positions. Doesn't happen too often, and we see a lot of false alarms. That's why we are so cynical.....we are so used to the church fighting any progressive change so hard, we doubt any lasting changes. This cynicism doubles (for me) when it deals with women....there is nothing the church is more fucked up in than it's position on women.

Maybe, some day the church will progress to the point where it fully accepts science, donates all it's riches to the poor, and stops existing. Don't count on it.

Besides, really....as long as the church keeps believing in that stupid god stuff, there will always be something for us non-theists to put down. We're not threatened....we're good!

prefunk

(157 posts)
59. Nice post.
Wed Apr 25, 2012, 11:54 AM
Apr 2012

But I have a question.

In your last paragraph you state that there are two groups resisting these developments, established religious authorities and non-theists threatened by anything new in religion that they cannot put down.

While I agree with your take on the first, how could you possibly know that the reason you stated for the second group is accurate? Could not a more plausible reason be that non-theists are threatened by the history of religion, which has made change after change for thousands of years, only to continue to be oppressive and exclusionary?

As a foster parent, I equate this feeling to one of the kids I had in my home who was physically abused by his parents. Even when placed in a loving and caring environment, he resisted the love and positive attention shown to him. Is that because he is "gun-shy" or because he was just unable to find a reason to be afraid?

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Religion»Something revolutionary n...