I was raised as a Roman Catholic. Up until my late teens I was a very strict follower of the faith, went to church every Sunday, etc. But then I gradually fell away from the Church. There were several reasons for this but here’s a recent story that reminded me of one of the most significant ones.
There have long been two distinct trains of thought within the Christian faith. One involves always turning the other cheek and providing constant handouts to whomever asks, no questions asked. The other involves holding transgressors accountable for their misdeeds and acts of charity more in line with “a hand up”. Ayn Rand’s philosophy is definitely connected with the latter. While I don’t agree with everything she has written, there’s absolutely no doubt that Atlas Shrugged had a profound effect on me when I read it in late 1993.
The earlier referenced news story refers to a group called American Values Network (AVN). Within the article, AVN is exposed for the frauds they actually are:
While the AVN is officially a non-partisan organization that wants to see Christians at the helm of both political parties, they’ve been vocal supporters for a number of Democratic initiatives, such as health reform and the anti-nuclear START treaty. They also focus on non-political initiatives such as medical aid for impoverished populations and housing aid for veterans, and advocate for morality-based policy solutions to climate change.
Reading between the lines, they’re mostly just a Leftist front group. The problem with that is that Leftism is, in practice, a religion (read “cult”) all on its own. Its precepts always supercede those of any formal religion. Leftists (aka “cult members”) can talk all they want about being Christian but in point of fact, that’s almost always just a talking point.
Getting back to the difference between a hand out and a hand up, Dennis Miller explains it another way: The Clueless versus the Helpless
(Now, I’ll try the body of my response to Kevin. Will it get throught he filter? I hope so.)
Kevin, thank you for your thoughtful post. I’m a Catholic convert from Anglicanism, which, like the United Church, has been “tossed to and fro and carried about with every wind of doctrine, by the cunning of men, by their craftiness in deceitful wiles” (Ephesians 4:14): both of these churches have embraced all kinds of practices which they considered sin just a few decades ago! Kyrie eleison.
Celibacy is a particular charism, which is lived, with grace, by most Catholic priests. Our secular, anti-Christian age has skewed this issue completely out of shape. Who’d be surprised that the Zeitgeist believes that everyone must have sex to be happy? What a myth! I’m sorry that you aren’t yet comfortable with confession, “The Sacrament of Reconciliation”: yes, it can be scary, but I’ve found that it’s actually a great blessing and a means of “amazing grace” for healing the heart and mind. Maybe one day, you’ll be able to try it out . . .
It made my heart glad to see you write this: “If I win the lottery next week, and have $1 million to give to charity, would I give it to any level of our government, or any currently popular charity, or the Catholic church? I hope it doesn’t surprise anyone that it would be the latter. Of all the entities on this Earth, the Catholic church, for all its faults, has bettered more lives, raised more hope, and created more good than any I can think of. Is it perfect? Of course not. Can it make things better, faster, quicker, and with less corruption than government? Indisputable, in my book.” Deo gratias!
The link above mirrors your thoughts here.
Someone quoted Christ’s Sermon on the Mount above (turn the other cheek, etc.). It’s oft quoted but not often put in context of the SOTM itself and the whole of Scripture. Therein lies the error of concluding Christians must be pacifist socialists who tolerate injustice.
LC Bennett writes, “In the end, I have decided that Christianity is much more attractive in theory than in practice.”
Considering that LC Bennett has decided, apparently, not to put Christianity into practise—which is, indeed, very hard to do—it’s no wonder that s/he has come to the above conclusion. E.g., As a person who doesn’t lift weights, I’ve decided that weight lifting is much more attractive in theory than in practice. But what do I know of the practice? Not much.
If LC Bennett wants to be more credible, perhaps this person should make her/his judgements from a more authentic position. I spend a lot of time with observant Christians and have found them to “fall short of the glory of God”, like the rest of us. But I’ve also found many of them to be truly transformed by their love of God.
In fact, a social scientist, Arthur Brooks, wrote a book called “Who Really Cares: The Surprising Truth about Compassionate Conservatism”, which appears to confirm my thesis.
From Wikipedia: “Originating in his research on philanthropy and drawing on survey data, he articulates a charity gap between the 75 percent of Americans who donate to charitable causes and the rest who do not.
“Brooks argues that there are three cultural values that best predict charitable giving: religious participation, political views, and family structure. Ninety-one percent of people who identify themselves as religious are likely to give to charity, writes Brooks, as opposed to 66 percent of people who do not. The religious giving sector is just as likely to give to secular programs as it is to religious causes. Those who think government should do more to redistribute income are less likely to give to charitable causes, and those who believe the government has less of a role to play in income redistribution tend to give more.
“Finally, people who couple and raise children are more likely to give philanthropically than those who do not. The more children there are in a family, the more likely that a family will donate to charity. One of Brooks’s most controversial findings was that political conservatives give more, despite having incomes that are on average 6 percent lower than liberals.”
So, just who do the hypocrites seem to be here? Food for thought, LC Bennett?
I’ve never understood why Catholicism has embraced the leftist ideals that threaten it’s existence.
Sorry, one more reflection:
Re LC Bennett’s: “In the end, I have decided that Christianity is much more attractive in theory than in practice.”
Does LC Bennett really believe that:
THEORETICAL universities/educational systems, hospitals, orphanages, homes for unwed mothers, shelters for the homeless, great architecture, like cathedrals, great works of visual art, like that of Leonardo DaVinci, musical masterpieces, like those by Bach and Tallis, monasteries and convents, which have always been oases of love and shelter in a dangerous world, compassionate disaster relief around the world, foster children programs, Out of the Cold/Heat programs in inner cities . . . the list goes on AND ON . . .
are more attractive than the REAL, FLESH AND BLOOD THING?
If the “outward and visible signs” of Christian learning, healing, worship, and charity (love) of all kinds all of a sudden became “un-incarnated”—e.g., disappeared from the scene—the whole world would look a lot like the wreck of a barren and war-torn country like Afghanistan. Think about it. Facile comments like LC Bennett’s don’t stand the test of logic.
As the Professor said in C.S. Lewis’s “The Magician’s Nephew”, “What do they teach these children in school?” Re Christianity—a lot of lies!
Touché and brava, lookout!
To LC Bennett, I actually have found, by trying it out and sticking to it, that Christianity is far more attractive (beneficial, healing, transformative) in practice than in theory.
You’d better try it before making such a stunning value judgment!
The Didache – a handbook for Christians that goes right back to the earliest days of the Church – says a great deal about charity and makes it very clear that it is not meant to support or encourage parasitism. “Let the coin sweat in your palm until you know the time is right to give it”.
That’s something less than scriptural authority, of course, unless you’re Ethiopian Christian; they include the later version, the Didascalia, as the last book of the New Testament.
2Th 3:8 Neither did we eat any man’s bread for nought; but wrought with labour and travail night and day, that we might not be chargeable to any of you:
2Th 3:9 Not because we have not power, but to make ourselves an ensample unto you to follow us.
2Th 3:10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
‘It made my heart glad to see you write this: “If I win the lottery next week, and have $1 million to give to charity, would I give it to any level of our government, or any currently popular charity, or the Catholic church? I hope it doesn’t surprise anyone that it would be the latter.’
Good plan. I hear the Pope needs a new diamond-encrusted hat to wear for Sunday dinners. Plus their crusade to spread AIDS in Africa is running out of free crosses to give away.
Yea, hard to make a spiritual connection to anything by Ayn Rand. That’s about the only thing I had issues with in reading Atlas Shrugged was her portrayal of the Church and her complete disdain and contempt for it and Spirituality.
Plus their crusade to spread AIDS in Africa…
Typical of a leftist, put the blame everywhere but on those actually spreading the disease.
Here come the excuses…3 2 1
There is nothing wrong with the celibacy of priests, Jesus DID exist and did set down the Sacraments for us and phil and Alex are trolls.
Yep, that’s the attitude I remember. If only all Christians were as perceptive and introspective as lookout and batb then all those who are ambivalent about religion would surely be converted to your humble and unassuming worldview.
I have respect for Christianity because of its place in history and development of western civilization. The modern variant, however, is much like the Liberal Party of Canada. It lives in nostalgia-ville and merely preaches about past glories. It is arrogant and out of touch. Too many “official” Christian organizations seem far more interested in money and politics than saving souls – UCC, Anglicans, RC and Evangelicals. You may have missed the part about how both the left and right in organized religions are proponents of using the state (via taxes and regulations) to accomplish most of the good works you list.
Mainstream organized religions are far too conformist, hierarchical and rigid for me.
Why fix something that is not broken?
For far too long people have begged this or that institution to be “more in touch”. That is why we have leftists infiltrating what used to be grand establishments, using its prestige as a veneer for their own purposes.
I cannot help anyone figure out their spiritual path. I can only attest what I know to be true.
batb, thanks—and our common faith history and journey (very interesting!), from Anglican to RC, might explain why we agree on so many things. Deo gratias!
LC Bennett, I appreciate your gracious remarks, however, I think you miss the boat here. First of all, to equate the RC Church with the Protestant, Zeitgeist churches, in which the now congregational Anglican Church has thoroughly established itself, is neither accurate nor legitimate. But, as you indicate, you’re not a Christian insider. So there would be issues that you only see on the surface. In a free country, that’s a legitimate place to be, LC, but it doesn’t exactly make your pronouncements on Christianity authoritative or reliable.
Theory versus practice: despite the evidence I’ve provided, LC, you still write, “It [the Church] lives in nostalgia-ville and merely [that’s a loaded word] preaches about past glories.” This is a mere assertion and actually untrue. I’ll concede that there is some unwarranted nostalgia in the Church. However, nostalgia, even if warranted, which it VERY often is in the Church, is more than balanced out by the REAL, PRACTICAL, ABUNDANT, and ON-GOING acts of mercy and nurture the Church has provided FOR MILLENNIA and continues to provide to this very second. (Perhaps you could provide a comprehensive list of secular charities, which support, especially, the weak and anyone, not just those who agree with them, around the world, on their own dime, 24/7/365. I’m interested . . .)
LC Bennett, you write, “You may have missed the part about how both the left and right in organized religions are proponents of using the state (via taxes and regulations) to accomplish most of the good works you list.” I beg your pardon? Please provide documentation to support this statement. (LC, you obviously have manners and some idea that you don’t know everything you’re talking about, but then you make an astonishingly demeaning and false statement like this.) How about the Home Schooling parents, who pay taxes for a public system and only want to school their kids at home, but who are now being FORCED to send their kids to public schools—right here, in Canada?
As a former Anglican and now a Roman Catholic, I know, that on top of paying our full share of taxes, Christians give gargantuan amounts of our own money to Church projects (did you note the Brooks book I mentioned?), which provide succour—material, emotional, and spiritual—much more immediately, personally, efficiently, and cheaply than the state does. (I personally know a number of Christians, who could take a European, or facsimile, vacation every year if they kept their donations for themselves. They don’t.) LC, you “may have missed” what Arthur Brooks’s data shows. (Apparently, he was not expecting, or even liked, the result his data led to.)
I’ve been busy with many things today, but, on reflection, realized that on my list of LC’s scale of Christian “theory versus practice”, I’d left out one of the most important aspects: how about the THEORY of Magna Carta—the rule of law—versus the PRACTICE of the rule of law? In 1215, the only reason the king would entertain the idea that he was not above the law is that he believed in God and was willing to concede that he, the king, was not above God. Now that God and Christianity have been shoved into the ditch, how is this working for us?
It seems that we have “theoretical” rule of law. Do we, post-Christian, secular, Western polities actually PRACTISE the rule of law? Hmmm . . . I don’t think so. How about the G20, Vancouver, Caledonia, etc., and our very own, HRC (Human Rights [sic] Commissions) kangaroo courts, where the rule of law seems to have been altogether suspended? E.g., In our HRC kangaroo courts, virtually all the former, legal protections for the accused have been shoved aside: the HRC tribunals are run by mere, political, often ideological appointees, the accused is guilty until proven innocent, the accuser may remain anonymous, does not have to testify, and has to pay no damages, no matter how frivolous or vindictive the case, or what the outcome (well, with the deck stacked, the accused virtually always loses), truth is no defence . . . you get the picture of the actual practice of law these days, once the theoretical basis (the Judeo-Christian idea of equality before God) has been completely debased.
Haven’t we seen this kind of perversion of the law before in recent times? Ah, yes, communism, fascism, and Nazism in the 20th century. Didn’t these secular, virulently anti-Christian regimes kill tens of millions, including their own citizens?
One should be careful what one wishes for. One doesn’t like the practice of Christianity? For the record, the practice of Christianity appears to have been, and to be, far more benign and beneficial to humankind that the barbaric practices of pre- and post- Christianity’s incarnations
To Alex at 1:47PM,
You realize that if you made similar comments about a certain other religion you would probably have the HRC’s after you for hate speech.
My favorite quote on the subject of government “alms” comes from Mother Theresa. Someone once criticised her saying, “the good work you do is largely unnecessary because if you didn’t do it, the government would step in and do it instead.”
Mother Theresa replied, “That doesn’t bother me because the government does not generally give love.”
To paraphrase: the food, shelter, nursing and medical care she gave were secondary. They were only the vehicles by which she delivered her real gift.
Bill, good point. Re Christians and AIDS: unapologetic Christian, US President George W. Bush, gave HUGE amounts of money to combat HIV in Africa—way more than any Democratic regime—about which many uninformed people, some here, have absolutely no idea. Here’s an article about this:
“George Bush: a good man in Africa
“As he starts a five-nation tour, the US president is an unlikely hero to the poor of a continent ravaged by Aids
By Chris McGreal in Kigali The Guardian, Friday 15 February 2008
“They may not be George Bush’s natural constituency but Rwanda’s prostitutes have good things to say about him. So do poor South Africans abandoned by their quixotic government, and doctors across Africa who otherwise regard the American president as a walking crime against humanity.
“As Bush arrives in Africa today at the start of a five-country tour he will be welcomed chiefly for an initiative which has gone largely unnoticed outside the continent but which has saved the lives of more than a million people with HIV.
“The $15bn (£7.6bn) President’s Emergency Plan for Aids Relief (Pepfar) is in its fifth year and has been hailed as a “revolution” that is transforming healthcare in Africa and has been praised as the most significant aid programme since the end of colonialism. . . .”
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/feb/15/georgebush.usa
Just WHAT IS IT about these “theoretical” Christians, who just can’t seem to get their act together to do anything “practical”? One might be tempted to say, “Good Lord, deliver us”!!
Pete E, lovely. You get it. Thank you.
“You realize that if you made similar comments about a certain other religion you would probably have the HRC’s after you for hate speech.”
Nonsense, and, even if true, completely irrelevant.
“To paraphrase: the food, shelter, nursing and medical care she gave were secondary. They were only the vehicles by which she delivered her real gift.”
Unnecessary pain and suffering?
Ayn rand has never set foot in a church never spoken to a pastor/priest yet you people are going to give her credence over what a pastor or priest says?
Or what other christians say ? that is kind of foolish don’t you think ..and while i think she is very smart when it comes to economics and thing’s of that nature and i agree with her …she has no dog in the fight of relgion
I know thism ay offend the athiest’s in here who take her at her word but her word is unfounded there is no backing to what her views of religion are .
That’s like me going to a dentist to get my transmission fixed and he tells me how to fix it with out ever backing up what he say’s ….I am not above critisim or haveing my faith crityisised or challenged ..but ayn rand just makes the stament that there is no god but she has nothing to back it up and the secular athieist’s lap it up as fact iti s really no different than david the fruit fly or al goracle telling us we should not have kids and the ice caps are dissapearing and iti s all mans fault ….where are the fact’s where is the proof .
talk about objectivism wow why don’t you athiest’s question her and take her to task the way you attack christians ?
Again ayn rand could solve alot of the owrlds problems ..but the fact is still there that the bibile commands us to give and to do good works ….and we as INDIVIDUALS SHOULD (not have) do those thing’s as individuals not as a govornment body or anything .
As a christian i would like to stop the govornment from donatingm y money to the third world and letm e decide where and how much i will give . i think alot of INDIVIDUALS would not feel so help less not to mention we would be able to see our selves first hand the fruit’s of our giving .
Again i don’t like the govornemnt performing these actions on my behalf , and ayn rand is very good at showing us why , but for her to say or imply that christians or religion is the reason for all of the worlds troubles is false and unfounded no matter howm any scenario’s are provided becasue there are alot of religious groups (mostly christian) who are doing good works throughout the world and making this world a better place . But christians are human to and we make mistakes no better or worse than athiest’s , nialist’s , or any other identifiable group again to me showing the validity of scripture and how we live in a fallen world full of sin and yes even christians commit the sins as well ….christians firstly and formostly openly and admit how flawed we are and how badly we need jesus’s salvation his victoryo n the cross was won for all every single human alive today it is up to us to accept it or not . I pray everyday that our leaders will turn thing’s around that god will work in there hearts and shine his light on everyone but again as long as we think like ayn rand that we are our own personal gods that we are good and should be judged by our works (like the pharisees) we will alway’s proove ourselves unworthy of gods gift of salvation …yet he still with our waver or question offers it to us through his son jesus , yet we continue to reject him and as long as we do we will all suffer and continue to see this world decay until hopfully we start to embrace scripture, until we start not just hereing but listening to the word of god listen to what the bible tells us and following it not like a chore but becasue we want to becasue iti s good right and just.
That is my opinion anyway thank you to those who read it!1
Ayn rand has never set foot in a church never spoken to a pastor/priest yet you people are going to give her credence over what a pastor or priest says?
Or what other christians say ? that is kind of foolish don’t you think ..and while i think she is very smart when it comes to economics and thing’s of that nature and i agree with her …she has no dog in the fight of relgion
I know thism ay offend the athiest’s in here who take her at her word but her word is unfounded there is no backing to what her views of religion are .
That’s like me going to a dentist to get my transmission fixed and he tells me how to fix it with out ever backing up what he say’s ….I am not above critisim or haveing my faith crityisised or challenged ..but ayn rand just makes the stament that there is no god but she has nothing to back it up and the secular athieist’s lap it up as fact iti s really no different than david the fruit fly or al goracle telling us we should not have kids and the ice caps are dissapearing and iti s all mans fault ….where are the fact’s where is the proof .
talk about objectivism wow why don’t you athiest’s question her and take her to task the way you attack christians ?
Again ayn rand could solve alot of the owrlds problems ..but the fact is still there that the bibile commands us to give and to do good works ….and we as INDIVIDUALS SHOULD (not have) do those thing’s as individuals not as a govornment body or anything .
As a christian i would like to stop the govornment from donatingm y money to the third world and letm e decide where and how much i will give . i think alot of INDIVIDUALS would not feel so help less not to mention we would be able to see our selves first hand the fruit’s of our giving .
Again i don’t like the govornemnt performing these actions on my behalf , and ayn rand is very good at showing us why , but for her to say or imply that christians or religion is the reason for all of the worlds troubles is false and unfounded no matter howm any scenario’s are provided becasue there are alot of religious groups (mostly christian) who are doing good works throughout the world and making this world a better place . But christians are human to and we make mistakes no better or worse than athiest’s , nialist’s , or any other identifiable group again to me showing the validity of scripture and how we live in a fallen world full of sin and yes even christians commit the sins as well ….christians firstly and formostly openly and admit how flawed we are and how badly we need jesus’s salvation his victoryo n the cross was won for all every single human alive today it is up to us to accept it or not . I pray everyday that our leaders will turn thing’s around that god will work in there hearts and shine his light on everyone but again as long as we think like ayn rand that we are our own personal gods that we are good and should be judged by our works (like the pharisees) we will alway’s proove ourselves unworthy of gods gift of salvation …yet he still with our waver or question offers it to us through his son jesus , yet we continue to reject him and as long as we do we will all suffer and continue to see this world decay until hopfully we start to embrace scripture, until we start not just hereing but listening to the word of god listen to what the bible tells us and following it not like a chore but becasue we want to becasue iti s good right and just.
That is my opinion anyway thank you to those who read it!1
Pete E @ 5:06…
“…They were only the vehicles by which she delivered her real gift.” was very well said.
To lookout, batb, and others I may have forgot:
Thank you for your thoughts and hope. I, who am lost at this time, still hold on to the belief that I will, in the fullness of time, come to faith.
It’s funny – tomorrow, I take my younger daughter to a driving range to teach her golf. Of all the sports I’ve played, none requires the faith that golf does. Whether you’re trying to drive the ball 300 yards, or make a 3 foot putt, if you don’t have absolute faith in your swing at the moment of truth – well, you’re either looking for your ball in the weeds, or lining up a bogey putt. You have all the time in the world to make your stroke. It’s how you make it – now, when it counts – that’s important.
It’s hard to explain to someone who doesn’t play the game, but a 3-foot downhill putt that breaks away from you requires absolute confidence and faith. If you hesitate, if you break faith with your stroke for an instant, the putt slides by. And you are left with the inescapable truth: that it was your lack of faith, your inability to hold true, your failure to believe that led to the miss.
Golf, like all sport, is inconsequential in the grand scheme of things, but all sports isolate and heighten some human endeavour. Golf, alone among sports, does not permit a “do-over”. You either make the shot, or you don’t. And, while Christian faith allows for forgiveness, isn’t the essence of Christianity what you do in the moment? You either help someone, or you don’t. You offer comfort, or you don’t. You are there for your loved ones, or you aren’t. It’s what you do when it’s important that counts, not any attempts to make up for it afterwards.
I hope, when it is right, that God grants me grace, and lets me find faith, that my weary heart will find true rest.
“You either make the shot, or you don’t. And, while Christian faith allows for forgiveness, isn’t the essence of Christianity what you do in the moment? You either help someone, or you don’t. You offer comfort, or you don’t. You are there for your loved ones, or you aren’t. It’s what you do when it’s important that counts, not any attempts to make up for it afterwards.”
No, the essence of christianity is that the boogyman will torture you forever if you don’t believe that magic-man sacrificed himself to himself in order to rescue you from the punishment he imposed. The things you list have nothing to do with christianity – they’re universal statements which require only the one-way nature of time in order to be true.
@ Lucky Lori very well said may the lord bless you in all your steps.
KevinB: “I hope, when it is right, that God grants me grace, and lets me find faith, that my weary heart will find true rest.”
Dear Kevin, I hope so too, and will be presumptuous enough to pray for you. God bless you and give you that grace and peace that you desire.
Kevin, what batb said. Thank you for sharing. God bless you.
@KEVIN B
It is there for you for free at no cost , listen and you will here the call , as a former athiest i did and it is soo true the cost of salvation to you is free it has been freely given to you if you so choose it.
God bless you and may he work in your heart that you may come to know him and his grace.