Catholicism - Blog Posts

Look, I may not agree with all aspects of Catholicism, but the sexualization of nuns needs to stop.

You are actively sexualizing a group of women who dress the way they do BECAUSE they don't want to be sexualized. The sexy nun costumes are not only not cute, but deeply insulting.

Do y'all do this to women who wear hijabs?

You don't have to like the religion but that's no grounds to be straight up disrespectful.

"her body her choice" well these women are choosing their own way how to dress---stop mocking them.

and if we kick all of the catholic girlies out of tumblr, who's going to write the gothic literature fanfiction that will emotionally devastate millions?

you cannot divorce lewis’ writing from his christian morality and worldview. you just can't. i'm sorry to everyone who's been duped by this “narnia is just a fantasy story and i can interpret it any way i want” idea because that is just fundamentally untrue. if you don't read narnia through a christian lens you are unavoidably missing the thesis of the work. and you're making yourselves angry over something the author makes very transparent. just don't read it if you can't get with it.

Rest in peace, Pope Francis. You will be missed by all Catholic Christians all over the world.

i am sure that hell must be cold

I’ve had a cute little llama xylophone for over a year- a gift from a friend when we found out I was pregnant with my daughter- and now she’s big enough to sit up by herself and play with it. It was a bit of a shock that made me tear up a little when I realized it.

Time flies. And God is so good. 🩷

Getting over guilt

Image by Pexels from Pixabay. Enhancement by me in Luminar 4 and Paint Shop Pro 7. I’ve had a rough time with this one lately. Anyone else? I don’t know if it’s the “obsessive thoughts” part of obsessive-compulsive disorder or the fact that I’m still kind of a recovering Catholic, even though I’ve partly returned to that faith, but either way, I am just haunted by guilt. Maybe the word…

View On WordPress

Matt Dillahunty: "God's a pr!ck"

Matt Dillahunty: “God’s a pr!ck”

Okay, those weren’t his words as I recall them, but let me explain all this. Screenshot of an Atheist Experience video with Matt Dillahunty (probably not the one with the quote). So as I’ve said before on this blog, my husband is an atheist. We both have YouTube running almost constantly on our TV (because we don’t have cable so we don’t have the Weather Channel [wah]). In my husband’s case, he…

View On WordPress

Doing the Akhu Rite for my mother

Doing the Akhu Rite for my mother

My mother, Eileen Pare. May 29-1943-May 11, 2020

I’ve continued doing Devo’s Making Ma’at rites into this year (and really have no intention of stopping, unless the world becomes miraculously better). Two days ago, I did the Akhu Rite for my mother for the first time.

Now, technically, I suppose I cheated. I think this rite is supposed to be used for those bas who have become akhu – in…

View On WordPress

For my Christian, Catholic, and general Jesus-believing people on here. 

I like Easter as much as the next person and I still celebrate it in a different capacity, but honestly? Jesus would be disappointed if everyone ignored his sacrifice and only focused on his coming back to life.

For years I have walked into near empty sanctuaries on Good Friday. While the church is packed on Easter, as people spill into folding chairs. This is something that causes me deep grief. People come to see the victorious Christ without even understanding the depth of his miracle. Now this year, the church is empty on both Good Friday and Easter. These are strange times.

At the last Good Friday service I attended at my old church, the pastor  proclaimed at the very beginning of his sermon “no one wants to be here.” He then rambled on about how it was important to be optimistic for the coming Sunday. I remember how anger rose up from deep within me, threatening to spill out from my mouth: “Pastor, we need to be here. It is imperative we be here at this moment.” I am not necessarily a fan of atonement theology, however, it is worse to turn our eyes and hearts away from the horror of Jesus’ death.

Easter is meaningless without Good Friday. Light has no meaning without darkness.

Jesus was murdered. Easter is a story about a criminal preaching of an alternative kingdom. Seen as a terrorist, he was murdered by the Roman Empire. We cannot nor should not ignore this injustice. Jesus could not rise from the grave without being executed by the state. His resurrection would be meaningless if he was not killed by the government.

I don’t like optimistic platitudes. Easter is not a story of optimism. The words that Jesus cried “Eli, Eli, Lema Sabachthani!” are proof of this. It is important to acknowledge that we are in pain, that it is okay to feel abandoned and lost… just like Jesus. Rather, we should approach Easter as a story of hope. The Hope of Jesus Christ. This hope is not empty words of positivity. It is radical. This hope shines through the darkness like a lighthouse in a raging storm. 

In the hours in between the crucifixion and the resurrection, the Apostle’s Creed proclaims that Jesus “descended into hell.” There are early theological ideas that explain how Jesus went deep into the darkness to save souls before rising on Sunday. Many of these theologies depict Jesus fighting Death during His time in the afterlife. An Orthodox idea that I particularly like is that Jesus defeated death with death. 

We cannot ignore that the world is suffering right now. Especially those on the margins of society. The people most affected by this pandemic are the disabled, the chronically ill, the poor, the “essential,” the indigenous, the elderly. People are suffering financial burdens. People are losing their jobs. People are enduring being trapped in homes that have no love. People are in pain, unable to breathe. People are dying. For so many people, this is Hell. 

Hope will be our guide in this Hell. Hope will lead us into confronting and fighting this pandemic as well as the corrupt institutions that enable it to spread. Hope will guide us into the resurrection.

Jesus eternally dies on the cross of this world. Jesus eternally rises from the grave. Wherever Jesus is, let us be. Amen.

Every action we take is fundamental to a better world that is kinder. I also recognize he had his mistakes and issues but he learned and he strove to do better. And for a Pope, that’s monumental. Rest in peace Pope Francis 🕊️

Pope Francis has died.

I know to a lot of people on the left and in the LGBTQ+ community, he wasn’t exactly seen as a holy herald of progressive values. That said I think he was more helpful to our community than we have ever really given credit.

The Catholic Church is hugely entrenched in the past. They may not ever accept gay marriage within our lifetime. But if you compare Pope Francis to any other Pope that came before him, he did more to progress the Catholic Church than anyone else ever has. He constantly spoke out saying that the church needed to accept LGBTQ+ members. He has denounced laws that criminalise homosexuality. He supported same sex civil unions—which I was literally taught was evil and dangerous when I was in Catholic high school. Transgender people can be baptized and same sex couples can be blessed because of him.

He was never enough, of course. He has affirmed the teaching that gay marriage is not spiritually possible and prior to becoming pope he opposed the legalization of same sex marriage. He has said gay children should seek psychiatric care. He has also been even less accepting of transgender people than same sex couples.

But at the same time he was the most empathetic Pope to have existed in the past several hundred years. I have left the church because I no longer believe in God, but I do recognize that the Catholic Church has power over huge swaths of the world. My mother still believes in her Catholic faith and has always stood by this idea: it’s impossible to move a behemoth organisation like the Church overnight. She stays in the community because she wants it to become better. She pushes, in her own small way, a little bit every day towards what she thinks is right. In this conversation, that is the acceptance of LGBTQ+ youths. Pope Francis was helpful in moving the Church away from a stance of hate. Now I hope that whoever the cardinals choose next for pope is someone who joins her in pushing that ball forward.

Holy Saturday’s vigil was lovely, even as I was visiting my in-laws and I didn’t have my altar cabinet or a church nearby who offered the service.

My paschal candle was prepared with my pocket knife with the Cross, Alpha and Omega and the year’s numbers, blessed with holy water and the ashes from the cut up bits of palm frond. I read from the Old Testament and the Gospel of Luke 24:1-12 (since in 2025, we are in Year C of the Lectionnary), read out the Litany of Saints, and played the Excelsis Deo with the ringing bells at around midnight. It was a simple and moving rite, and one that I love to take, since it has a section in the scripts used to undertake a renewal of baptism and vows.

My mom went to a church in St. Ambroise, in Saguenay for her vigil. She brought back a vigil candle, and Lillie was intrigued!

A Happy Easter to all the faithful, and I hope your day is filled with joy and love among your families and friends!

March 19th was Saint Joseph's Day. While I worked all day, this looks like a beautiful moment to connect with him. Thank you, joanofarcs-stigmata for sharing this rosary prayer!

Rosary Prayers of St. Joseph for the Feast of St. Joseph, Foster Father of Jesus

Usually when we think of rosaries, we think of Mary-- after all, if you were to pray all 20 mysteries, you'd be saying 200 Hail Marys! But while the traditional rosary uses Mary to center our gaze on Christ, another form less often discussed uses the examples left to us by Saint Joseph to better connect with God. The Saint Joseph rosary uses Joseph to help us better understand purity, fidelity, and humility, all while celebrating Joseph's role in the Holy Family, while asking for his intercession to help us imitate his trust in God.

The 'Hail Joseph':

The Saint Joseph rosary begins like most rosaries, with the sign of the Cross and Apostles Creed, but instead of a 'Hail Mary', we pray the 'Hail Joseph':

Hail Joseph, Son of David, spouse of Mary. Blessed art thou among patriarchs, and blessed is thy Holy Family. Holy Joseph, Guardian of Jesus, pray for us sinners now and at the hour of our death. Amen.

The Mysteries:

The Betrothal to Mary: Let us contemplate now how the Blessed Virgin Mary was betrothed to a man named Joseph, of the house of David, beginning a loving partnership, not of a union of bodies but a communion of souls; through this mystery may we better come to understand Godly relationships, friendships, and devotions, should one experience them.

The Annunciation to Joseph: Let us contemplate now how Joseph, being a righteous man, decided to divorce Our Lady quietly when she was found with child, and how the angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream and declared unto him that the child had been conceived through the power of Holy Spirit. Through this mystery, may we better come ot understand faith in our fellow man and faith in God's will.

The Nativity and Naming of Jesus: Let us contemplate now how Joseph went up to Bethlehem with Mary, and while they were there, in the city of David, she gave birth to the Savior, Christ the Lord. And when eight days were completed for his circumcision, he was named Jesus. Through dwelling on this mystery, may we obtain the greater reverence for the Name above all names, Jesus Christ the Lord.

The Flight into Egypt: Let us contemplate now how Joseph, being a devoted spouse and guardian of the Holy Family, took Jesus and Mary to Egypt. Through meditating on this mystery, may we come to have a fiery love of the displaced and oppressed.

The Hidden Life in Nazareth: Let us contemplate how Joseph took Jesus and Mary to Nazareth and there lived a quiet life working as a carpenter with Jesus and Mary at his side, through the joys and sorrows of everyday life, until the end. May we all have the gift of a peaceful death with Jesus at our side.

Closing Prayers:

Pray for us O Blessed Joseph that we may be made worthy of the promises of Christ. Almighty and eternal God, grant, we beseech thee, that by meditating upon the mysteries of the Rosary of Saint Joseph, we may imitate his prayerful trust, and faithfully carry out your holy will, despite difficulties, uncertainties, and fears. Through our Lord Jesus Christ, your Son, who lives and reigns with you in the unity of the Holy Spirit, God, for ever and ever. Amen.

Hail, holy Joseph, Hail, Chaste Spouse of Mary, Hail! Pure as the lily flower In Eden’s peaceful vale. Hail, holy Joseph, hail, Prince of the house of God. May His best graces be By thy sweet hands bestowed.

Hail, holy Joseph, hail, Comrade of angels, hail! Cheer thou the hearts that faint, And guide the steps that fail. Hail, holy Joseph, hail! God’s choice were thou alone. To thee the Word made flesh Was subject as a son.

I wish I was religious

I love the idea of truly believing in something or someone higher than me, having someone to dedicate part of my life to and look to for guidance.

Unfortunately at like age 5 i woke up one day and decided I don't believe in anything except science

but religion can be such a beautiful thing and I wish i could push myself to actually believe in anything

Love, in order to be true, must hurt.

Saint Mother Teresa of Calcutta

Me and who🙏

isn't she but your reflection

chant sacré, 1899  • émile joachim constant puyo

if ur looking for me ill be at the prayer candle & meth pipe store

And they blamed God for the atrocities they inflicted on themselves, human to human.

They asked why He looked on as they dismantled each other.

They couldn't even use right the thing they bragged about: free will.

"God, intervene" - their excuses are their acceptances that they can't be without You.

God or No God ? No God.

Well, No GOD !

no Existence no Love no Science no Atheism no Self no Facebook.

…so well then, GOD.

Now, if you cannot prove to me that science solely exists on its own,

please let me believe my God in peace.

For all your knowledge, inventions, discoveries might as well be duplications of what God already created in the beginning.

Tell me something new— something beyond the CHATGPT that thinks like a man, replies like a man, and relies solely on the knowledge of man, a creation of God.

So let me have my God, while you perfect your machines.

An Essay Against Calvinism

As a premise to this essay I want to note that I write all this as a Christian, I go to a Baptist church but I was also greatly informed by many of the Catholic Church’s teachings on numerous matters. In this context it is plain to see that I don’t intend to negate the validity of a Calvinist’s faith, however I truly believe that there are some completely mistaken ideas that are either introduced by Calvin himself or held sacred by contemporary Calvinist cells. Connecting to this last sentence I must add that many of my complaints and reflections come from contact with actual Calvinist theologians and from current -- sometimes underground -- publications by them.

First of all I want to present the claims and concepts of the Calvinists that I’m going to argue against. (#1)Out of many articles of teaching they are most boastful of the center of their theology, which they say is God and they contrast it with other denominations’ different focuses -- or at least as they perceive that this contrast can be legitimately made. At the core of their Scripture interpretation lie two crucial elements: (#2)the Predestination “fact” derived from Paul’s letter to the Romans; and (#3)a very broad incorporation of the Old Testament’s teachings. There’s also the doctrine of (#4)“Total Depravity”, which states that men can do only bad things -- meaning all men at all times do only bad things.  And lastly there is (#5)a contradictory stance held by Calvinists on the principle of “Sola Scriptura”.

#1: As it will be explained in the point about Predestination, Calvinists support and try to resolve the internal conflict of their theology by referring to God’s infinite greatness, his infinite power, and the infinite influence of his rulings. They use these attributes of Him to get rid of all logical counterarguments because, quite undeniably, He’s above all human intellect, so we cannot take up a fight against Him in any way, not even dialectically. This comes together with -- again from another point -- the faith that God decides about everything constantly. Predestination to them means that God actively makes unbelieving souls believe, by His own selective choosing. This is always irresistibly happening, but in fact this is the case with all things in the world: God makes everything happen.

Without spoiling my second argument too much, this, in a nutshell, is why they think the focus of their theology is God -- they refer to Him about everything. This is usually put in contrast with how other denominations treat the questions of faith and Christian conduct: all other schools of Christian faith believe there is an active human component in these matters. For example: when somebody is converted to Christian faith a generic Christian will say “He found God”, whereas a Calvinist will make the same assessment through these words “God made him believe”; another illustration is that in generic terms someone would “sin”, in Calvinist terms someone would “not be forced to do good things by God”. I hope this clarifies it: Calvinists do not in fact put God more at the core of their focus than other denominations, they only erase other words from their dictionary*. This trickles down to their theology in a peculiar way, as they find it arrogant of other Christian theology’s to involve positive action and human initiative in their tenets because those are not autonomous, instead made directly by God. Why would anyone mention something else, or explain something through other means than God’s work, when that is all there is? goes their argumentation. 

I find it to be a serious misunderstanding of the contrasted denominations to say about them that they don’t put God at the center of their theology in the same exact way as them. In fact they say the same things with regards to God: He is all-powerful, all-encompassing -- the real difference is what Calvinists think about human beings. In a way they don’t believe in humanity. Not in the way that they don’t praise humanity or believe in its power to save itself, rather they don’t believe in its existence. More on this denial later, back to the point. As I’ve said, these theologies follow the same pattern, all believe there’s no salvation through actions, only through Christ but Calvinists laugh at the idea, when other denominations teach the believers about everyday conduct or talk about the search for purity. And they can’t avoid but laugh, since for them it is futile speech, men can do nothing on their own. Men’s every minute is ruled by God, if they be pure, God made it, if they be bad, God didn’t make them be pure.

This is an important mistake because all of Jesus’ warnings against pride and evilness fade in the shimmering light of denying the need for any Christian to strive to follow the teachings of the Bible -- after all, he’ll follow if God rules it, and he necessarily won’t if God doesn’t, he has no internal agency to act or remain inactive. Probably another point will bring more light on this...

#2: In Romans 8:29-30 Paul talks about how God has known and decided about His own before time to become like His Son. I was paraphrasing because I tried to both encapsulate the part that Calvinists base their teachings on and remain true to the text, not to accidentally bend it toward anything I might unconsciously prefer to be there -- I even tried to utilize the original Greek’s meaning for the most attainable truthfulness. The other bedrock of the Predestinarian Calvinist faith is the first part of the ninth chapter of Paul’s letter to the Romans.

It is an extremely dubious thing what the Calvinists do: they pose an interpretation of these scriptures and claim it is explicitly the content. I say it’s dubious because somehow non-Calvinists didn’t take up this mental and it’s never really been the canon interpretation. So they rely on one very revered source of the past: Augustine. His turn from Manicheism gave the Christian tradition one of its greatest theologians and philosophers, yet he shouldn’t be named as the one Calvinists will rely on. Augustine first championed the existence of free will, then, arguing against other schools of thought, went on more and more to shrink away from it. In The City of God he introduced the concept of God’s election for His salvation. It was much more moderate than Calvin’s but about near the end of his life, Augustine got to a point, where he, in a way, denounced free will and got to the point Calvin did. The reason he’s not an ideal theologian predecessor is that he never rested at any one state of opinion on the matter of predestination but kept it changing from work to work. Its evident reason is that he was continually arguing against others and in this fashion of reactionism were his interpretations born. Today we’re not having a discussion with the Plageans, there’s no actuality of his works, they should be inspected with a much more contextual approach and more analytically, not accepted as, well, Scripture. I want to note that I don’t intend to discredit Augustine, as there’s absolutely no way for me to do that, as he’s clearly my intellectual superior and I’d be a predestined loser in a sparring match, still, it’s important to see that there’s something forced in the Calvinist approach to legitimize their claims of predestination.

The Calvinist concept of predestination is as follows: God, in his sovereignty, elects certain individuals for salvation. Others He elects not, as everybody is worthy of damnation, which even further glorifies His loving kindness and goodness, since He does elect some by His grace. 

First of all it is crucial to remember that, despite what Calvinists claim, only the Calvinist interpretation of the texts from Romans is the above one. Other denominations and schools of faith never taught that this is the meaning of Paul’s words. Mind you, despite the claim that this is explicitly what he says. This statement of mine must be amended because the Calvinist interpretation isn’t completely dissimilar to others, traditionally Christians have believed that God works in people to help them to get to faith and on their own people wouldn’t be able to find salvation. Even so, this is what the work of the Holy Spirit in us is most often credited for: He helps us to break free from our flesh and eventual death, in order to be resurrected. This I do not argue against. Yet, it’s not identical to the Calvinist version.

The reason why predestination isn’t an interpretation that Christians traditionally believed is that salvation has been connected to Christ’s sacrificial death on the cross, His resurrection, and faith in it. Even though Paul doesn’t speak of any of these things in these verses. His mention of the Pharaoh, of the Jews and Gentiles, seem to show God’s workings on Earth. Especially so, since in these cases there was no Gospel, at the time of Moses the Jews didn’t have a concept of any afterlife or salvation, yet they were elected. If this election means election for salvation, then God’s saving works used to be happening completely without the sacrificial death of His Son, which I think is blasphemy. If we make the step as to say chronology is irrelevant from the point of view of God, there still seems to be a problem with Evangelization: if people were saved unknowingly, why does the Bible put an emphasis on the spreading of the Good News? Why does it matter? The question of afterlife for people before Christ’s time is quite mysterious for us but the Calvinist answer is outright contradictory, to say the least. It seems that Paul could possibly mean something other than God would choose on His own accord to save some and damn others, and like most Christians believe, there likely is a reality on the part of human initiative with regards to faith, even if not achieved completely alone.

Now there are Calvinist responses to these:

Predetermination is argued against because it seems illogical, whereas it seems so only because humans are much lesser beings and what constitutes logic**? Human constructions, whereas God’s great works far exceed those. He wills what He wills, that is His sovereignty and we are not to understand it but to abide by it and make ourselves subjects to it.

This is problematic only because predetermination seems to reflect solely the Calvinist vision, and I suspect they refer to God’s sovereignty only in order to prove themselves, as His rulings are indeed inarguable. Traditionally this isn’t the interpretation, logically it isn’t the interpretation, there is no reason to accept it, other than Calvin and Augustine said it and that falls into the category of tradition, which proves weaker than the entire Christian tradition; whereas if someone claims to have come to the same conclusion about predetermination, they used their logic, which is again overruled by sounder logic.

God is great, in fact He is the greatest in existence. It is arrogant to assume He needs our assent, that is, our initiative, our, so called, faith, in order to save us. If He wills to save someone, He cannot be stopped with any obstacle and if He wills not to save someone, those cannot somehow get into salvation.

My answer to this is that God’s irresistible greatness is made evident in His work of Salvation through Christ. That cannot be undone by anyone or anything, it is done forever. It is superfluous to go as far as to assume He must decide for us. This is, of course, assuming that it is possible for humans to autonomously believe. I will explain this later but it is a crucial question because Calvinism tends to express its stance not dissimilar to disbelief in human existence. So the problem with the Calvinist argument is that they believe non-Calvinists think God needs us to repent, on our own, is because He couldn’t otherwise save us and that makes Him look incapable of overcoming our will. And yes, evidently He can harden and soften people, but were it the case that people could decide to believe or disbelief, He could let them. God’s all-powerful work is that we can be saved and if we believe there’s no circumstance that can take us out of salvation -- simply, Calvinists reject the notion of free will.

#3: Now it is universally true that for sound doctrine it is necessary to incorporate the entirety of the Bible, that is, including both Testaments. Why Calvinists differ from other Christians in their doing so is that they look at it normatively (not differing from all schools of faith, as fundamentalist interpretations usually follow the same pattern). This is problematic because in the New Testament it becomes quite evident that Gentiles are not required to conform to old Hebrew rules and patterns and in the light of the Gospel the Old Testament’s essence seems to be revealed to be something completely beyond normative texts: it is a narrative gradually moving toward the final revelation, which is Christ as the Son of God and as the Savior. Paul also talks about the role of the Law in the Christian life, and in addition to this, many texts of the Old Testament, especially the ones concerning normative parts, philologically seem dubious, as in attributing rules and laws to Moses whereas they were created much later. This makes it questionable in the context of usefulness as normative texts and it seems just more likely that they are included in canon for other reasons, namely for context, or helping to create the image of Christ throughout the Old Testament. Now this is not as elaborate as the previous arguments but I hope I have at least made this argument at least an inspiration for understanding the underlying problem with this trait of the Calvinist faith.

#4: Calvin introduced the concept of Total Depravity in Institutes. It’s based on several verses from the Bible and he concludes that all men at all times are doing evil things and they cannot help but do that.

I will present three counterarguments to this, the first one I consider a weaker one, the second one I consider a more powerful one, and the third as an auxiliary one.

Firstly, through empirical inspection it is quite visible it’s untrue. Not only in the sense that not all people are doing the most vial crimes imaginable at all times but also seen in how sometimes people perform completely innocent acts. There’s familial love and care, which isn’t universal but at least general and usually observable. To this can come a counterargument of selfishness. People can perform seemingly innocent acts but be, in their spirits, totally depraved while doing so. Selfishness is widely accepted as a manifestation of sinful nature and when a mother takes care of her child, she wants gratification, she wants some subtle pleasure in return. This is understandable and eerily similar to Kant’s moral criteria of the categorical imperative. Still, many idealists, who aren’t Christians, show self-sacrifice for the sake of a good cause, without any hope or desire to be remembered or praised for their achievement. It is a rare, noble behavior, but nonetheless observable. Of course, what is empirical evidence, when a man can be deceived, or can misunderstand what’s before his eyes? This is why it’s a weak argument, when dealing with higher things than base natural science.

Secondly, Calvin seems utterly and irreverently selective with regards to his choosing of Bible verses. From the time of Noah, when everybody was evil, yet a man truly just before God existed, through the Psalms, which describe evil and good people, to Paul, who was quoting the Psalmist, everywhere in the Bible there is a dichotomy of Good and Evil persons. It’s very important when dealing with this matter. Even outside of the community of generally accepted believers there seems to be, at least portrayed, gracious characters in the Bible and contrary to a selection of decontextualized verses, the Bible never categorically claims that people would be inherently incapable of doing anything but evil. In fact, it would be futile to call anybody to do good or resist evil, were it impossible for them. While sinfulness in nature is apparent, its totality is Calvin’s invention. Other schools of faith teach the doctrine of deprivation in the way that all men are sinful and cannot achieve salvation, therefore are in need of God’s mercy, realized in Christ and His work of salvation.

The reason I find need for an auxiliary argument is that with total deprivation comes the incredible doctrine of human-denial. The ultimate response to any criticism about total deprivation is that men can do only wrong and God can make them do good, when He decides so. He does that for the sake of His own children’s benefit. This means that humans are bound to take the course of evil, unless by God they are bound to do good. The horror in it is that for anything to be alive it must have agency, it must be autonomous but if we are truly not doing things on our own accord, as we cannot possibly alter our will to decide between good or bad, we are not in fact real agents, we are not in fact alive (in terms of soul or spirit). Also, this claim is self contradictory, as if men were incapable of doing anything good, the evil they do would not be their own responsibility. For, are we responsible for things we don’t decide to do? Are we responsible for things we are forced to do? This can’t be a true state, as God is just and righteous, He isn’t condemning people if they are not responsible but they are. In Romans 9 we see a seemingly similar line of argument, only that applies to the election and that has already been discussed above.

#5: The principle of “Sola Scriptura” is that faith is based solely on the Scripture. Yet, this is, illustrated by my previous arguments, far from realized in the Calvinist system. They have their own inventions, their own interpretations and they cling to it and often choose to change the scripture to fit to their doctrines. There are visibly higher authorities than the Scripture among Calvinists and not only Jean Calvin himself -- but he certainly is --, but Councils and texts declaring doctrines. Of course, many denominations utilize extra-biblical sources to base their rituals and modes of teaching on, what separates the Calvinists is the hypocritical nature of it. While a church may have an influential tradition, it is possible to remain true to the Scripture, theologians only have to know which is which; in contrast with the Calvinist way, where tradition and authority is said to be the Scripture or its only right interpretation.

In conclusion to this essay I’d like to add a few notes. Most importantly the reason behind writing this is twofold: on the one side I find a few great errors in Calvinism, especially the kind I encounter through certain theologians and their influence, and I am worried it would spread (evidently more and more people are impressed by it); and on the other side I haven’t seen any denomination in my life be as actively critical and hostile toward other churches as the Calvinists, and it’s important to see that the ones who call the Catholics non-Christians and non-Calvinists as lessers, do in fact comprise the greatest sect in Christianity. These last few words might seem very harsh and I only half-mean them but in light of the above arguments I find myself strongly leaning away from them. Ultimately, I mean no harm, I intend not to hurt any Calvinist’s feelings, I’d be thrilled to continue it as a conversation on faith, and, most importantly, I don’t think Calvinists can’t be saved by God because of their mistakes.

Before commenting consider the following: this is not a scholarly work; I have written it truly as a Christian, don’t try to mix into this essay any other religion or atheism.

NOTES:

*In James there is a lot said about acts and while they’re still no way of salvation, he points out they are necessarily part of a living faith. It is for this reason that non-Calvinists typically mention good acts and even include it in their teachings, since, according to James, a good conduct is inevitably paired with faith. (I wonder if Calvinists are ever puzzled by James’ words.)

**Logic is often associated with humans, as inherently flawed, just like them, whereas in reality logic is the formalization of the paths to right conclusions. In this way it’s easy to see logic can’t be blamed, as it, by nature, cannot err. Where there’s failure in the conclusions, there’s a lack of sound logic. It’s a little bit beside the point, that’s why it’s a note, nevertheless, I thought it important to remind us all that logic is never the culprit, it’s not human-like in any way, it is a precise way of formulation, much like language is a way of expression, yet we -- while language is often unable to fully express something -- don’t make it the Big Bad and reason of false ideas.

***”schools of faith” is a phrase here, referring exclusively to Christian theological teachings and nothing of other religions, nor pseudo-Christian ones

Santa Muerte

NO. 1

A skeletal figure dressed in robes or dressed in the virgin’s shroud, Santa Muerte is both the Grim Reap-ress and the Angel of Mercy. She is the personification of death, and her full title, Nuestra Señora de la Santa Muerte as she is well known as, brings an ambiguous and malleable identity that is associated with healing, protection, and safe delivery to the afterlife by her devotees, as her following, especially in 21st century is being celebrated all over South America, but especially Mexico City to the United States and Canada.

NO. 2

Even though Christian missionaries and leaders condemned the religion, Santa Muerte ‘‘offers hope to a society threatened with hopelessness. In the colorful barrios of Mexican culture, the figure of Death is ubiquitous. With the lure and dangers of narco-culture, the violence among competing youth gangs, the haunting realities of an economy in collapse, and the gravel fight to survive in a Tepito marketplace; Mexicans face the reality of death on a daily basis. Santa Muerte, the image of death, protects them from uncertainties in their everyday lives. When Death is the only guarantee, it seems like Death is the only one to be trusted.’’ The worship of Santa Muerte began in the mid-20th century and was clandestine until the 1990s, were most prayers and other rites have been performed traditionally at home. Now in the 21st century, worship has become a more public thing. Santa Muerte has a male counterpart in the U.S, called the skeletal folk saints San La Muerte of Paraguay and Rey Pascual of Guatemala.

NO. 3

So, what caused the worship of Santa Muerte to become a massive, worldwide following? Drug violence, for one, and loss of faith in Christianity. ‘‘Former Mexican president Felipe Calderon’s declaration of war on the cartels in 2006 was received with praise by North American politicians, as in their view, it seemed that the Mexican government was finally taking a strong stand against the cartels and that there would be a swift resolution to the social problems associated with drug trafficking. This open war declared on the cartels resulted in an escalation of drug violence and forced several dramatic changes in the safety of Mexico and its already chaotic social scene. Military personnel, paramilitary groups, and the cartels have been fighting for control of the country and have created a state of panic in the border towns and beyond. The panic and violence in the north have begun to gradually make it’s way south and reach areas that were once ‘safe’. According to the BBC from 2006 to 2012, more than 50,000 individuals have died from drug-related violence. Amidst the drug-related instability, the once strong and influential Mexican Catholic Church has been losing credibility, support, and members. The loss of faith in the Catholic Church could be caused by many factors: general pessimism, individuals searching for other forms of faith, and the result of the church’s support for governing political parties.’’

NO. 4

Who is Santa Muerte? Anthropologists and historians J. Katia Perdigon Castaneda and R. Andrew Chestnut agree that the veneration of Santa Muerte is a combination of Catholic imagery and rituals from Meso-American pre-Hispanic gods and rituals. There is a common list of names for the goddess, such as Mi Nina, (My little girl), La Nina Bonita (the Pretty Girl), La Madrina (the Godmother), and Mi Amor (My Love)—adoring names that tighten the relationship between devotee and saint. There are darker allegations like Senora de la Sombras (Lady of the Shadows) or La Negra (the Black Lady). There is also La Hermana Blanca (The White Sister) and Hermana de la Luz (Sister of the Light). She is celebrated on the Day of the Dead, November 1st and 2nd. better known as Dia De los Muertos.

Catholicism storytime

Ok so I am baptised catholic but in no other way raised towards christianity, I didn't go through first communion. But when I was a teenager I was at the first communion of my younger cousin. So I'm at the church, I shake hands or whatever and then it is time for everyone to receive communion, which of course was not something for me to partake in. But as I was between the benches where there was no room for people to go around me, I moved to the aisle to let them go. But I found myself in the middle of the crowd, all walking towards the priest. I was trying to be polite so I really didn't want to force myself the other way through everyone, so I just went with the crowd, looking around, trying to find a place to escape but I couldn't find any. So as the crowd was pushing me closer, I accepted my fate. But I didn't know how does one receive communion, so I observed the facial muscles of the people before me and decided that they were just saying Amen. And then, I am the one standing before the priest, he says his thing, I say amen and receive the communion. I return to my family and they are wide eyes open at me and they laughed a little.

I really want to know what does the catholic church think of this situation, never had a formal first communion, never confessed, never goes to church, does not believe... Does this count as just an unceremonial first communion? Or like what now am I going to superhell or what lol

John 6:51-53 says, “ I am the living bread that came down from heaven. If anyone eats of this bread, he will live forever. And the bread that I will give for the life of the world is my flesh.”52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, ‘How can this man give us his flesh to eat?’ 53 So Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.” That’s fairly unambiguous: his followers are confused about why Jesus would give them flesh to eat, whereas they wouldn’t be confused about being giving bread to eat. They also would not refer to ordinary bread as flesh.

In addition, according to Luke 22:19 and Matthew 26:26-28, Jesus, when giving the disciples the bread/flesh at the Last Supper, said, “This is my body given for you.” He didn’t say, “This is a metaphor for my body.” He said, “This is my body.” Although Jesus frequently spoke in parables, we know from Mark 4:34 that he would explain the parables to his disciples: : “When he was alone with his own disciples, he explained everything.” If communion was metaphorical, Jesus would have explained it. There’s no indication that it was meant as a metaphor.

Seriously, one of the important tenets of Protestantism is “sola scriptura,” so why would you ignore the clear statements of Scripture on this topic?

Okay, new rule: if you regularly consume the blood and flesh of a demigod in a room full of chanting elders you’re not allowed to call other religions primitive and evil

That’s a pretty cool political opinion you got there dude. Did your web of online friends and mutuals who all subconsciously monitor each other and self-correct in a panopticon-esque fashion to ensure that your views all stay in line with each other’s at all times pick it for you?