Is a full time job.
At which the current batch of admins has dismally failed.
But then, it was never their job in the first place. They’re admins not baby sitters.
So why don’t they restrict themselves to administration and stop pretending to be moderators?
So, was your Catholic church wedding ‘holy matrimony’ or not?
But apparently you don’t honour it in spirit, according to your current anti-theism. You actually spit on (reject) the religious vows, rather than honouring them.
Gregory, clearly, if I no longer believe that there is, or ever was, a personal deity that hovered at our wedding and witnessed our vows, then that is what I no longer believe.
It makes absolutely no difference to those vows, which I meant, and kept, including a vow that was not actually a marriage vow, but one which I also made at the marriage ceremony, which was to raise any children in “Holy Mother Church”. That I did, conscientiously, despite not being a catholic at the time.
It is bootless to argue that because I no longer believe in the God I believed in then that my marriage vows are somehow invalidated or broken. I did not vow to believe in God for the remainder of my days. I vowed to love and cherish my husband for the remainder of our days together. That I meant, and still mean.
And while the help of God would be nice, the fact that I do not think that help will be forthcoming in the sense I thought it would be at the time, again, it makes absolutely no difference to the validity of my vows. At the time of my marriage I considered it blessed. I still do. But it would be dishonest of me to say that I think the blessings flow from the source I believed they flowed from at the time.
Yes, it was. As I said, I now mean something rather different by the world “holy” from the way I understood it at the time. And of course it was, and remains, recognised by the Roman Catholic Church as a valid marriage. I could not get it annulled in canon law.
Yes, I honour it in spirit, ffs, Gregory. I made no “religious vows”. I’m not a fucking nun.
Just saying you now believe it wasn’t actually ‘holy matrimony’, Elizabeth, would save space. That you call it ‘blessed’, as an apostate atheist, is nice. But unconvincing. Dennett really has done a number on you, hasn’t he with his ‘evolutionist’ acid?
“in spirit, ffs” – Elizabeth
The Roman Catholic Church does not recognise atheists as Christians.
But would be a lie. I don’t lie. I was married in a catholic church. It was a nuptual mass. I made vows I kept and continue to keep. It is recognised as a valid marriage by the catholic church. It is a blessed marriage. Marriage is also called matrimony. Yes, I regarded our marriage as holy matrimony at the time. I probably would not use the word “holy” now, because of its connotations of dependence on a supernatural deity. I still regard it as holy.
You are making me very cross.
Nor does it recognise its members as atheists.
He’s trying to make you cross. Go watch his Tedex talk and understand why he is so bitter.
Well, I wish he’d actually mount an argument, rather than casting aspersions on my integrity and that of my marriage vows.
*harrumph*
Yeah, I watched his talk. I’m also reading his book. I don’t know why he’s bitter. He just seems rather confused.
Elizabeth,
The bitterness came from KeithS review, I think. He came here as the self proclaimed, credentialed “big I am”. The locals were amused / not convinced.
I guess that depends on how you (re-)define appreciate.
Who is unconvinced Gregory?
You? So goddamn what.
Why would anyone care if you’re convinced, or not? Mind your own business and keep your unseemly opinions to yourself.
The only parties whose opinion matters as to whether Elizabeth’s marriage is “blessed”are Elizabeth, her spouse, and perhaps a deity (if there were a deity witnessing the couple’s vows to each other).
You really need to learn to quit raggin’ on people when you have stupid irrelevant opinions.
Not only will they be happier without your useless negativity, so will you!
What’s that you always say? Elevate yourself? Elevate yourself, Gregory.
Well, we all have to cope with not being convincing. I’m still trying to convince people that consciousness is perfectly explicable in material terms and that there is no Hard Problem, merely an Ill-Formed Problem.
ok, so what kind of nun are you? 😉
“Nor does it recognise its members as atheists.”
So you currently consider yourself an atheist ‘member’ of the Roman Catholic Church?
Or perhaps a Made Up Problem that arises given a certain philosophical view. One might ask what is the history behind this supposed problem.
Oh no you didn’t! *shockface*
Oh yeah you did.*embarrassface*
Oh no*sadface*
No, but as you may know, it’s very difficult to leave the Roman Catholic Church, from their PoV, unless they kick you out. I would be regarded as “lapsed”.
Gregory, if you really want to claim that half the world agrees with you on Abrahamic monotheism, I afraid you’re just going to have to take lapsed Catholics (and Reform Jews) as Catholics and Jews. If you want a test (which would be OK with me, incidentally) and also keep anything like those numbers you bragged about, I think you’re going to have to make it a very easy test.
EDIT: You might even have to include Food Jews. You know, people whose only interest in the religion is chopped liver and gefilte fish.
Yes, that is a potentially good approach I think. I have some ideas.
“It was a nuptual mass”
Nuptial, not nuptual.
“So you currently consider yourself an atheist ‘member’ of the Roman Catholic Church?”
“No” – Elizabeth
What does that mean? That you’re not an atheist or not a member of the Roman Catholic Church?
Rich:
Gregory’s sociologist colleagues haven’t bought into “human extension” either, which must rankle.
It means that I do not consider myself a member of the Roman Catholic Church, atheist or otherwise. However, the Roman Catholic Church, having failed to excommunicate me, will beg to differ.
Elizabeth,
🙂
Good catch.
Thanks. You don’t seem very sensitive anymore to vertical things. I do wish you better.
Lizzie:
The Lutheran Church (Missouri Synod) actually excommunicated me, which gave me a sense of closure. It was needlessly hard on my mom, though.
I have no idea what this means.
Hee hee hee hee. Ha Ha, Whoo hee. Ha ha ha ha ha ha. Ah ha.
Every time I find myself wishing that Elizabeth would just bite the bullet and put Gregory into permanent moderation, I see something like that.
Laughing until I got tears in my eyes.
Thanks, Gregory!
What did you do or say to be excommunicated, keiths?
Elizabeth,
Given your anti-institutionalism, I would suggest Kierkegaard’s “Love Abides”.
For what, Gregory?
For the nothingness & numbness you now sadly profess to believe in your atheism.
“What we have here is a failure to excommunicate” really ought to be a line in something.
“the Roman Catholic Church, having failed to excommunicate me…”
You left and spoke actively (TSZ) against it. That’s apostasy.
Stale material, Gregory.
0 out of 10 for humor
0 out of 10 for originality
0 out of 10 for topical relevance
0 out of 10 for appeal to the desired audience
Next!
‘What we have here is a failure to be religiously (authentically) Jewish.’ Was that ex-reform KN?
Actually, there’s some interesting scholarship on verticality as a metaphor for transcendence and horizontality as a metaphor for immanence.
But I don’t profess to believe in nothingness, Gregory. That’s your assumption, or at least your interpretation. And I am not numb.
Fine.
Gregory, what are you attempting to do here? Shame me back to the church? Convince me that when I ceased to believe in a creator deity and an afterlife that I was wrong?
Because if so, you aren’t doing a very good job.
You will not shame me back to the church because I do not feel ashamed of having left. In fact, I feel somewhat ashamed that I was party to its evils by giving it conspicuous support. However, at the time, I felt that the evils of the church were peripheral to the core truth it proclaimed. Then I ceased to find that core truth convincing except in terms that did not require the postulation of a creator deity and an afterlife.
And if you want to convince me of the reality of a creator deity and an afterlife then you will have to do better than call the integrity of my marriage vows into question.
Man, I envy you, Elizabeth, because I am SOOOO numb right now.
Is that what he meant?
Elizabeth,
That’s how I’ve always interpreted his remarks, but only Gregory can say for sure.
Sorry man. I expect they wanted you to be ‘a lesson’.
Oh my, that’s a much more charitable interpretation of what Gregory meant by “vertical things”.
I picture stripper poles.
And other “vertical” things. 🙂
Poor Gregory, always having so much trouble communicating.
Vertically or horizontally numb? Or just comfortably?
Not really. I immediately understood what he meant.
Gregory,
I just stopped believing and coming to church. They sent me a letter — I wish I had saved it — asking me whether I still believed and whether I had joined another congregation. I said no and no, so they excommunicated me.
They even posted it in the Sunday church bulletin that was handed out to every worshipper. My mother had to deal with the pain not only of seeing her son excommunicated, but also of seeing it happen in full view of her fellow, judgmental congregants.
You understood he meant stripper poles, too? Wow, great minds really do think alike.