Church: a "bad" institution?

[The 10th Plague]

Do you think the christian organised church system (i.e Catholic church) is a bad institution?

I do think it is. Just look at history; millions and millions have died "in the name of the holy church". Today, still thousands are dying every day because of the church. This may seem weird, but lets not forget that the church forbids condoms. So, many followers don't use them, resulting in SDT's such as HIV/AIDS. And as everybody knows; AIDS is a killing disease. Also by actions of the church another , let's say, 500 million people in this world aren't socially accepted because they are homosexual or bi-sexual. The church forbids homosexuality mainly because of "laws" stated in the book of Leviticus. But remember that Leviticus contains numerous "laws" that would be dismissed immediately these days (it says for instance that you should be killed if you would have an affair). Because of the continuous anti-gay campaign of the church, homosexuality still isn't accepted in a lot of country's (Even in The Netherlands; THE place for gay rights, homosexuality isn't completely accepted). But can gay people do anything about the fact that they're gay? Ofcourse not! It's like being white or black; there's nothing you could do about it; you're it from birth. Oh, and I forgot to mention the anti-womens campaign the church has for about 1000 years now. Just look at your history books; 5 million innocent women were executed during the inquisition.
Well, I've only mentioned some pure facts here - and certainly not every fact; it would take me days to mention all - so let's come to the interpretation of these facts.

Would we let a vicious killer to be unpunished? No, ofcourse not, I think everybody will agree on that. Then, why would we let go the Church, for it has killed millions, and left even more in despair. Ofcourse we can not "punish" the church for all it's mistakes, as many are very very old, but on many mistakes the church even doesn't apologies. As said before, the church still has several idea's which are just cruel, and kill. On that, the church should be punished.

By the way: I've been raised as a catholic, and although my upbringing certainly wasn't religiously strict (my parents sort of don't believe), it's obvious to me that Catholicism has a sort of unwritten law which states this:
Accept everybody on this planet, unless:
a)They're women
b)They're homosexual
c)They're not catholic.

[snoogit]

Why limit the criticism to only the Catholic Church? similar atrocities can be equally attributed to the Protestant Church, and the Orthodox Churches.

[prometheus]

Why limit the criticism to only the Catholic Church? similar atrocities can be equally attributed to the Protestant Church, and the Orthodox Churches.
....jews and Muslims too. Not sure about Taoists and eastern ones.

[banzai]

I think any organizational formation around something that is largely founded in a personal relationship between one and God outside of the sole purpose of supporting that relationship is grounds for corruption and struggles for power and money.

Now, I've seen very large churches that have managed to keep the focus, but once that focus is lost, the leverage that leadership of such a large group offers can go to some people's heads.

Past that, though, I think religion (or rather, belief in the supernatural of some sort) isn't inherently bad.

[Oversphere]

I think that actively recruiting religions like christianity are kinda like an infectious mental illness. I guess you could say that the non-recruiting religions are more like a hereditary(though not through genetic means) mental illness. I don't have much good to say about organized religion, and I have the usual objections to it. It's all about using fear to control people. It would be a great improvement if humanity could dispense with magical beliefs, but unfortunately a tendency toward belief in magic seems to be hard-wired into most human brains.

[brewmaster]

Any time you submit your free will to the belief it is bad, because some god (actually a human, when you look at religion) said it was bad, is as bad as it gets.

The idea christianity persists about heaven, and islam about the x amount of virigins in some heaven is just about as absurd as I can imagine.

Muhammad existed (unlike Jeebus, he has a historical record of having existed), and he probably was an ENTJ, due to his creation of a wonderfully controlling religion. Christ never existed, but the people that made him up were probably ENTJs as well. Religion is really brilliant though, when you can get people to believe. And there are plenty of sheep for that.

[The 10th Plague]

I think any organizational formation around something that is largely founded in a personal relationship between one and God outside of the sole purpose of supporting that relationship is grounds for corruption and struggles for power and money.

Now, I've seen very large churches that have managed to keep the focus, but once that focus is lost, the leverage that leadership of such a large group offers can go to some people's heads.

Past that, though, I think religion (or rather, belief in the supernatural of some sort) isn't inherently bad.

Actual believe in a godlike deity, isn't principally bad. But belief systems, like organised religions, tend be "bad", as they create various dogma's for its followers. There's virtually no personal input of an individual in a belief system. And as belief systems are based on the believe in a godlike deity, believe in such beings can be interpreted as "bad".

[Lucid]

I think any organizational formation around something that is largely founded in a personal relationship between one and God outside of the sole purpose of supporting that relationship is grounds for corruption and struggles for power and money.

Agreed!

[Danellian]

I agree that it is bad to be religious to the point of not thinking for yourself. Institutions are made up of humans, so they are corruptable. We cannot get to God through an institution, or through anyone else, for that matter, except for ourselves. If we could divorce the idea of spirituality from religion, I think that would solve a lot of problems.

[rocksteady]

faith vs logic

sensing, feeling types use faith to cope with their lack of logic. I don't know that there is anything we can do about this.

[blueback]

Success requires diversity. There is nothing wrong with a way of doing things that turns out to be useful in a new situation.

You can say that the feeling types are trying to make up for their lack of logic, but I've seen a lot of logical types who are trying to make up for their lack of feeling.

[OneBadMother]

I think that the problem with any church that could be referred to as "The Church" is the problem with any large, organized institution which requires unquestioning loyalty of their followers. :P The same problem exists in governments and corporations, and getting rid of one long-established structure than people cling to won't make all the other long-established structures that people cling to dissapear. ESFJ and ESTJ are the two most common MBTI types, and they seem like the two most likely types to need some sort of structure to have a purpose for existing. :P

[toonia]

My question is whether organized religion was the impetus or the vehicle for such organized violence. That has not been clear in my mind. Religion is one of the most effective social organization tools and for this reason it is a powerful tool to reach its intended aims, whatever those be. In instances where religion is removed from society, organized violence has been shown to flourish under political, and other, ideologies as well.

[rocksteady]

You can say that the feeling types are trying to make up for their lack of logic, but I've seen a lot of logical types who are trying to make up for their lack of feeling.

Good point, I wonder who has the more difficult battle?

[Danellian]

Toonia, I think this is a very good point. What this is really about is human nature and how we are living our lives. Let me be the first to point out that I really don't live my life nearly as well as I could. But if you look at all the negative things across history, they occur primarily due to the choice of the individuals involved, even if it is under the name of an institution or a cause. While social factors can influence our behavior, that does not mean we are not responsible for our choices and the autonomy we choose to exercize over our environment. I see it like this: We have to determine our own destiny, not let others do that for us. Otherwise, what is the point of living? I am not an existentialist, but nor do I fit the stereotype of the typical church-goer that many of you are complaining against. I think there is a middle ground, a point of balance, between these varoius extremes, and that this is where truth lies.

Danellian added, 7 Minutes and 32 Seconds later...

Blueback, you are right, there is no cause to hold some types as superior to others. I value my own strengths very highly, but that does not make them superior to those with different strengths. In fact, there are times when I could do with learning from others with marked differences from myself.

[The 10th Plague]

@ Danellian,

Ofcourse there is difference between people, and I think these differences should be welcomed. But that's just the whole point; in organised religions there is no room for differences. An individual is not a unique entity in an organised religion; an individual is a number.

Yes, people are responsible for their own doings, but fact is that in an organised religion there is a GROUP of people, or - more likely - a leader responsible for many actions. This is because there's no room for individuality in organised religions - as I said before. When a soldier gets a command to kill someone, that soldier will do that most of the time. When that death will seem wrong after a while, you can not merely accuse only the soldier. The soldier was GIVEN the command by the military. So, the military - or the commander in question - should be accused as well. This also occurs within organised religions. So, the (leaders of an) organised religious institute (i.e church) is (are) to be accused.

[Danellian]

10th Plague, hence, why I say I am not your typical church-goer. Sometimes I attend church, but not every weekend. I find it can be beneficial, but not necessary, and it is certainly not beneficial for those who go in the name of religion. I do not define my spirituality in terms of the church, not in terms of religion, but in terms of my own personal experiences of God. Hence why I think spirituality is still valid even though religion is not.

[The 10th Plague]

10th Plague, hence, why I say I am not your typical church-goer. Sometimes I attend church, but not every weekend. I find it can be beneficial, but not necessary, and it is certainly not beneficial for those who go in the name of religion. I do not define my spirituality in terms of the church, not in terms of religion, but in terms of my own personal experiences of God. Hence why I think spirituality is still valid even though religion is not.

I agree on that...

[Danellian]

I thought you might.

[blueback]

I think there are a lot of people in the world who just want to lose themselves. They pick lots of ways to do it, religion is one of those ways. They like the idea that "they" disappear and are replaced by "them" united in a common purpose which just happens to be the bestest most perfectest purpose any group on the planet has ever united behind.

The problem with things like stupidity and short-sightedness is that they prevent their own solutions.

I think that's where the mid-life crisis comes from. People FINALLY realize they aren't living the way they want to. The evidence has been in front of them all along, but it takes 40-50 years for them to get past themselves and see it.

Humans are, at their core, emotional beings and most of them never learn to act on anything other than their emotions. Religion satisfies their emotions by making them feel like they belong, like they have a purpose, like they aren't wasting their time, like they have all the time in the universe, like they are better than someone else. It's easy to understand why it's attractive. Combine that with a legitimate feeling like there is something "out there" and it wouldn't make sense for them not to be religious.

[Danellian]

Blueback, you're argument rests on the presupposition that there really is no correlate to the religious intuitions people have. Second, it's not primarily feeling. Spiritual experience begins with intuition, not feeling. Intiution is a perceptive function, spiritual experience is a perception (a gathering of information). How people apply said experience to their lives, how they interpret the experience, and all that, is a judging function (making judgements and conclusions about the information). The feeling comes in when people take their religious experience and construe it to mean something it did not. Third, feeling has a place, but like anything else, including thought, it needs to be used in it's proper place.

[blueback]

Based on your post in that other topic, you are an idealist, so this post you just made actually makes sense.

I'll state this simply so that you can't misinterpret it. . .

I am not a idealist.
I have hopes, but I make decisions based on what is possible and what is efficient, I compromise. What I said about religious people is a testable hypothesis. What you said a jumble of wishful thinking.

Or maybe it's not. Maybe, since you are spiritual and I am not, you understand things about it that I can't understand. If that is the case you are going to have to work on how you explain your thinking because it's not coming through clearly.

That might be the same in my case. Since I'm not spiritual and you are, maybe I understand things about life as a non-spiritual-ist that you don't. I think we are going to have to be more careful how we define what we are talking about in the future.

[Bossy Mom]

I wouldn't go to church, but my daughter wants me to go with her.

How many people have nazism and communism killed? Let's talk about Stalin, Hitler, Mao Tse-tung, Pol Pot, that nut in North Korea, etc.? Read The Black Book of Communism. When people begin talking about killing in the name of religion, I think about the Taliban and those other fundamentalist Muslims. Christianity is not the same as it was during the Inquisition.

I think people like religion because it is so difficult for the human mind to accept the idea of infinity.

[OneBadMother]

Infinity, chaos, and death. I think fear of all three could characterize the "need" for religion throughout history.

[Ice Wolf]

I think there is not much difference between any of main-stream religions and other social ideologies.

1. They are all based on (boring) book describing a difference between good and evil. (Marx's Capital, bible I, bible II, Koran aka bible III)

2. There is always some ultimate power with some worshiping rituals . Early instances of mass controlling ideas used bearded guy capable of lighting control. Later used little less obscured but omnipotent masses of people with non mistakable righteousness.

Example of practical use:
In name of God… (insert certain amount of random atrocities)
In name of people… (insert certain amount of random atrocities)

3. All great ideas are also based on equality not freedom. (I've always found political slogan "Freedom and equality" a little bit contradictory, since the practical implementation of freedom always results in some form of inequality and vice versa). Induction of equality is the best method for creating self controlling flock. Flock is always taking care of unorthodox souls like INTPs . All you need then is to get rid of stubborn INTJs. Inquisition or some sort of secret service (NKVD, GESTAPO) are very efficient organizations for dealing with latter.

4. Some goal is also helpful : make God happy, achieve genetic purity...

5. And then you need a solid enemy to glue pieces together. Historically It seems that Jews were quite a popular pick, than homosexuals, various nations, different social classes etc.

I think this is the universal recipe for exploitation any systematic congregation of humans.

[Hdier]

I don't think that the church is bad, but I don't like the churches that I've been to, and have lost faith in the majority of churches. All to many times, things are quoted out of context and words are twisted around. I don't read the bible very much, but I pray for guidance and go to passages that 'feel right'. It has helped me a lot.

[Antares]

I don't think that the church is bad, but I don't like the churches that I've been to, and have lost faith in the majority of churches. All to many times, things are quoted out of context and words are twisted around. I don't read the bible very much, but I pray for guidance and go to passages that 'feel right'. It has helped me a lot.

Wow. I may be ignorant, but you're one of the only people I know who do that. Most I know rely on sacred institutions.





Camelopardalis added to this post, 3 minutes and 40 seconds later...

Do you think the christian organised church system (i.e Catholic church) is a bad institution?

I do think it is. Just look at history; millions and millions have died "in the name of the holy church". Today, still thousands are dying every day because of the church. This may seem weird, but lets not forget that the church forbids condoms. So, many followers don't use them, resulting in SDT's such as HIV/AIDS. And as everybody knows; AIDS is a killing disease. Also by actions of the church another , let's say, 500 million people in this world aren't socially accepted because they are homosexual or bi-sexual. The church forbids homosexuality mainly because of "laws" stated in the book of Leviticus. But remember that Leviticus contains numerous "laws" that would be dismissed immediately these days (it says for instance that you should be killed if you would have an affair). Because of the continuous anti-gay campaign of the church, homosexuality still isn't accepted in a lot of country's (Even in The Netherlands; THE place for gay rights, homosexuality isn't completely accepted). But can gay people do anything about the fact that they're gay? Ofcourse not! It's like being white or black; there's nothing you could do about it; you're it from birth. Oh, and I forgot to mention the anti-womens campaign the church has for about 1000 years now. Just look at your history books; 5 million innocent women were executed during the inquisition.
Well, I've only mentioned some pure facts here - and certainly not every fact; it would take me days to mention all - so let's come to the interpretation of these facts.

Would we let a vicious killer to be unpunished? No, ofcourse not, I think everybody will agree on that. Then, why would we let go the Church, for it has killed millions, and left even more in despair. Ofcourse we can not "punish" the church for all it's mistakes, as many are very very old, but on many mistakes the church even doesn't apologies. As said before, the church still has several idea's which are just cruel, and kill. On that, the church should be punished.

By the way: I've been raised as a catholic, and although my upbringing certainly wasn't religiously strict (my parents sort of don't believe), it's obvious to me that Catholicism has a sort of unwritten law which states this:
Accept everybody on this planet, unless:
a)They're women
b)They're homosexual
c)They're not catholic.

I don't know where I should provide my opinion, since I don't attend churches and may be unfit to comment, but I do know that they're quite into conversion. You see those huge groups of choral missionaries floating around seeking to recruit.





Camelopardalis added to this post, 2 minutes and 3 seconds later...

Any time you submit your free will to the belief it is bad, because some god (actually a human, when you look at religion) said it was bad, is as bad as it gets.

The idea christianity persists about heaven, and islam about the x amount of virigins in some heaven is just about as absurd as I can imagine.

Muhammad existed (unlike Jeebus, he has a historical record of having existed), and he probably was an ENTJ, due to his creation of a wonderfully controlling religion. Christ never existed, but the people that made him up were probably ENTJs as well. Religion is really brilliant though, when you can get people to believe. And there are plenty of sheep for that.

Christs never existed? Really? Not to sound cynical, but what evidence or reasoning did you use to reach this conclusion?