Thursday, February 07, 2008

Discussing Religion

Prata brings up an interesting comment today, so instead of just responding in the comments section, I will devote a post to it. Okay, actually I have got nothing to write about again today, so this sort of acts as the filler.

I have discussed religion with lots of people, and you know, sometimes assumptions are made that are so full of crap. For instance, I assume that the person I am talking with knows about their own religion. And you know, that is not necessarily true.

I have heard others say, "Well, a neighbor of mine was Catholic, and he said . . . ." And it ends with a statement that is totally ridiculous. Like we don't really worship Jesus. I used to get mad at this, and then, after a while, I am just glad they did not torch the Catholic neighbors house.

But I do the same thing. There are a lot of Baptists in the area, and if I am talking to a Primitive Baptist, and they make a statement, I just take it on faith that they know what the hell they are talking about.1 I don't go to their document of salvation and find out for myself. Partly because I am lazy, and it is easy for me just to poke holes in what they say, precisely because they sort of screwed something up. Generally, when you look at the doctrine up close, things seem a whole lot more plausible.

Catholics get razzed because priests can't marry and are supposed to be celibate. Did you know that Pope Silverius was the son of Pope Hormisdas? We are talking sixth century AD, so this was a long time ago. Well, I did not remember their names, but looked it up on Wikipedia. Still may not be right, but I have read and heard of a father-and-son pope. The Catholic Church did not always have this celibacy rule in effect.

Okay, there are some kooky rules for picking Pope, and I also sort of wonder why there have been so many Italian Popes. Pope Adrian VI, elected in 1522, was the only Dutch Pope, and last non-Italian to be elected pope until John Paul II in 1978. Now, it is hard for me to believe that the selection of a non-Italian Pope should only happen every 400 or so years.

The history of the Catholic Church – of many churches, really – can be really interesting.

I guess, my spastic point is to remember that just because someone belongs to a church, does not mean you should believe they know what that church really espouses. Oh, and you probably should not torch their house, even if they are wearing suits and giving out free Mormon Bibles.2

All of this religion got me to thinking about a recent – or not so recent – "Dictionary of Jack" video (song). JackDanyells, a really cute YouTuber, wrote and sang the original song, part of which is shown below:

The Ism Song
When it comes to religion
You can't go wrong
There's a million-billion isms
To help you find god
There's Taoism
Buddhism, Hinduism too,
And of course there's Judaism
For all the Jews.

omnism says religions are swell.
Atheism says there's no heaven or hell
Even Catholicism has its cross to bare
And there's always agnosticism
If you just don't care

Oh, and I have to imbed the video because he is so hot. I mean, because he is so insightful and clever.

Considering most of my audience is male, I guess I should imbed Hot for Words as well. If I was from another country and had implants and blond hair, I guess I would be her.

So much for me not having anything to say today.

1Yes, I purposefully placed the words "faith" and "hell" close to one another. Just because.

2I knew a friend who assumed the Mormon Bible was just another version of the King James Bible. Er, yeah, I have some really dumb friends.


Deb said...

Another great post. Love your wit and insight.

LarryLilly said...

I like all isms, as long as your ism doesnt interfere with my ism, and I dont have to fight the war of your ism because you say its to protect ALL isms.

Since we are in the "Silly Season" (political election cycle) we hear of candidates talk about their ism's. Now since we are a nation that "believes" that all men are free to worship their own ism, even if its athe-ism, then candidates shouldnt "practice" talking about their own ism. Because even if its pagan-ism, well, what they do "should" be OK with us (as long as it doesnt violate other laws such as abuse to animals, people or rocks).

BUT we dont always "believe" that the constitution allows different ism, it only refers to "MY" ism, so your ism isnt protected, and since we live with the concept that majority rules, then if your in the minority, "your" minor ism is certainly not protected, and you should move to where you came from.

So I look at what John Lennon said, wouldnt it be great if their were no isms. But my ism doesnt allow that! LOL

Prata said...

By the way I knew that Catholics didn't always have celibacy started in like 1020 or something close to that..I dont' remember...and I'm too lazy to look it up.

Then in 1140 or late 1130 all marriages were ptu to an end and priests had to divorce their wives...again...too lazy to go look it up I don't remember which of the clergy instituted that stupidity. Some hypocritical name. Innocent or something like that. I mean really? lol

Ian Lidster said...

This was really well-considered and extremely interesting, Leesa. You are indeed a multi-faceted and intelligent woman, and darn cute, too.
An interesting thing about priestly celibacy is that a priest doesn't always have to have been celibate. I know one man, who is now a hermit priest, who was an Anglican (Episcopal) priest, who was married for many years. When widowed he entered the Catholic priesthood and that was all completely acceptable.
By the way, have you ever heard Tom Leherer's 'Vatican Rag?' I think you'd find it very funny.

グラント said...

Being evil, I'm not required to follow any rules. As for the rest of you, I've long since given up on trying to group religions and I just accept that every single person has their own unique set of beliefs. Some may be close enough to form their own ball team, but if you ask a person enough questions you'll find some divergence somewhere.

For instance, a person I know who is a strict Southern Baptist who uses a bible (I forget which one - there are so many today) that excludes the part in the New Testament about the resurrection of Christ. Apparently that is not central to the xtian religion. It's still better than a former coworker who claimed to be half Catholic.

Anonymous said...

I really like the -ism song, though I thought he left out several important ones, such as
alcoholism - the worship of Jim and other spirits
Prism - the adoration or rainbows
Prism - where prisoners go when they can't spell

As for the celibacy thing, there is a very interesting, but very long article at
Skip down to the section called, "HISTORY OF CLERICAL CELIBACY". It started as far back as 295 AD.

And as for Mormons, they use the King James Bible and accept the Book of Mormon as additional scripture.

~Deb said...

Ha, the theory of alcohol-ism. Story of my life.

For some reason, I just couldn't concentrate on the "words" spoken in that video....there was something very LARGE in the way....

I'm going back.


seattledrizzle said...

And then there is Schism where you start your own ism!

Leesa said...

dr deb: Thanks, sweetie. I enjoyed writing it.

larry: I always liked the song "Imagine" by J Lennon.

prata: When a man becomes Pope, he takes the name of a saint, and Innocent was used to name a bunch of children killed because their parents were Christian.

ian: I have met formerly married priests, many of which are from Hawaii.

grant: since not believing in rules is a rule, aren't you kinda screwed? I mean, with this evil thing and all.

annon: you know, there were also female priests. In England/Wales. Not that the Church really said it was fine, but you know the English. About 600 AD.

~deb: he is a hottie. And in another video, he is shirt-less.

seattle: Yeah, the Church had its Schism that separated Roman Catholics from Eastern Orthodox.

Prata said...

Thanks! That...I didn't know! Sweet!

Sister Sassy said...

Well I decided to go one post deep :) We got smacked down by the server guy at work so I limit my posting.

Anyway interesting post today. Religion has always been touchy with me. Especially since I grew up in a cult (wrote about that on Wed).

Jeremy said...

"I knew a friend who assumed the Mormon Bible was just another version of the King James Bible. Er, yeah, I have some really dumb friends."

Actually, the "Mormon Bible" is the KJV version of the Bible. The Book of Mormon is a separate book of divinely revealed truth. If you would like to see this "from the horse's mouth," as it were, you may take a look at the scriptures section of For instance, for the OT, the page is You will see on the first page the same reference to "His Majesty's Special Command" that you see on any KJV Bible.

So, if your friend thought that the Book of Mormon is the same as the Bible, you are correct. However, if your friend meant that Mormons use the same version of the Bible that anyone else does (with the exception of different footnotes), then he/she is actually correct.

Leesa said...

jeremy: the Mormon Bible is way different than the King James version of the bible.