Debate is good, but we’re always right
So what’s the point?
According to the Pope, it’s okay to debate theology, but in the end their revelations are more true than any reason. This is bullshit, and dissolves any incentive to dig and debate points of theology. And that is what is wrong with ALL religion today — they do not allow questions, challenges, serious debate, or anything else that would reveal their “revelations” as bullshit.
Pope Benedict said the censures of Abelard’s work are a reminder that theologians must be careful to give precedence to the principles of faith that come from revelation and not to interpretations suggested by philosophy.
How utterly insane.
Pope Benedict said that among the reasons St. Bernard asked the pope to condemn Abelard “there was a preoccupation to safeguard the simple and humble believers, who must be defended when there is a risk that they would be confused or led astray” by the work of certain theologians.
And just how long ago were Bernard and Abelard arguing these things? Oh yeah… it was back in the 12th Century, back in the Middle Ages when the general population was not educated, could not read, and were under the thumb of the Catholic Church and constantly reminded they weren’t capable of independent study, thought, and research. The Church had a vested interest in keeping the population ignorant in order to perpetuate their “revealed truth”. And they had plenty of medieval tortures to keep everyone in line, so as to squelch any heresy and independent thought.
And they are still doing it.
The pope said Abelard’s teaching on morality was ambiguous because he insisted that a person’s intentions were the final criteria for determining whether an action was good or bad. The pope described such a position as “a dangerous subjectivity.”
“As we know, this is very relevant in our age when the culture seems to be marked by a growing tendency toward ethical relativism (in which) only I decide what is good for me at this moment” and actions are not seen as objectively good or bad, Pope Benedict said.
Here’s a clue, Benedict: There are very few things that are actually and objectively good or bad. Morals and ethics are highly subjective and relative. People’s motives have a lot to do with what they do, and when they do it, and how. It is always important to consider motives and reasoning (along with circumstances) before outright condemning an action.
People who are morally insufficient in themselves and need outside ‘help’ to tell them what is right or wrong, or when, should not be given too much authority over others. People who point to the Bible as a reason for their behavior are (in my opinion) morally insufficient. People need to be able to give sound reasoning for their actions, and “the Bible says…” is NOT sound reasoning. There’s always more to it — WHY did the Bible say it that way and in what context? In what other context does the Bible say something else? (Virtually EVERYthing people use from the Bible to justify their behavior is contradicted someplace else in the Bible.)
So when the Pope says it’s okay to debate theology but not okay to disagree with his revealed truth, he’s talking in circles and actually rejecting serious debate.
“Revealed truth” is nothing more than myth and superstition, and it carries no weight in real life.
