Clergy who stop believing

[Lion IRC]

Atheists masquerading as clergy.
They have a word for that.
And its not "doubt". It's not "apostasy". It's not "deconversion".

It's called FRAUD.

So quick to judge. Where was your outrage when we found out that the Roman Church has been sheltering and enabling the criminal pedophile priests in their midst for generations? Its called CRIMINAL CONSPIRACY.

I dont think you read my post carefully enough.
I said "masquerading".
Atheists pretending to be priests.
If you want to join the dots to other examples of things which aren't what they seem, so be it.

You know, if I see a bank robber fleeing from the bank disguised as a Nun, wearing a habit and rosary beads, my first thought isn't that the Church needs to do something about its bank robbing Nuns problem.

...
Lion IRC I understand the outrage you would feel as a believer thinking that someone would occupy a pulpit and accept a salary that way.

I would have thought atheists would be outraged. They are bringing atheists into disrepute, not priests.

 

[Harry Bosch]

Atheists pretending to be priests/clergy. Hmmm.

...I never did believe those artificially low 'atheists in prison' demographics either.

It appears as if you have it backwards. These preachers weren't originally pretending to be Christians. They were Christian preachers who lost their beliefs and either left the church or stayed out of loyalty to their parishioners.

Why do you find it so hard to believe that a lot of believers, including preachers, lose their beliefs? Most American atheists were raised as Christians, including myself.

I met a youth pastor at a bar once. One of the saddest nights of my life! He was totally down. He had lost all his faith. However, this profession was all they he knows. He was in his later 40's. Paid very well. He loves working with kids. But felt so guilty in trying to turn them away from their families and society and towards his church. His church was his family. All his friends are in the church. Not easy to change your stripes in your late 40's.

 

[Harry Bosch]

I dont think you read my post carefully enough.
I said "masquerading".
Atheists pretending to be priests.
If you want to join the dots to other examples of things which aren't what they seem, so be it.

You know, if I see a bank robber fleeing from the bank disguised as a Nun, wearing a habit and rosary beads, my first thought isn't that the Church needs to do something about its bank robbing Nuns problem.

...
Lion IRC I understand the outrage you would feel as a believer thinking that someone would occupy a pulpit and accept a salary that way.

I would have thought atheists would be outraged. They are bringing atheists into disrepute, not priests.

My favorite Christian trait is their willingness to forgive and not judge. It's very admirable.

 

[ideologyhunter]

My favorite is that way they have of selling all their possessions, giving the money to the poor, cancelling their insurance policies, and living as free loaders on the road. Now that's sanctified.

 

[funinspace]

I dont think you read my post carefully enough.
I said "masquerading".
Atheists pretending to be priests.
If you want to join the dots to other examples of things which aren't what they seem, so be it.

Yeah, I'd like more dots/substance over snark. Like do you really think all these former clergy grew up faking faith in Jesus/Christianity, then faked faith in Jesus/Christianity while in seminary, and probably again faked faith in Jesus/Christianity as they started their work journey? And then years later, decided to go public after they faked a change in belief?

You know, if I see a bank robber fleeing from the bank disguised as a Nun, wearing a habit and rosary beads, my first thought isn't that the Church needs to do something about its bank robbing Nuns problem.

Wow...such an example. Funny, my first thought would be 'its a bank robber in disguise'. My second thought, is 'really, such a silly red herring by you'.

...
Lion IRC I understand the outrage you would feel as a believer thinking that someone would occupy a pulpit and accept a salary that way.

I would have thought atheists would be outraged. They are bringing atheists into disrepute, not priests.

Nah, no outrage here, I have sympathy for them...

 

[Atheos]

I dont think you read my post carefully enough.
I said "masquerading".
Atheists pretending to be priests.
If you want to join the dots to other examples of things which aren't what they seem, so be it.

You know, if I see a bank robber fleeing from the bank disguised as a Nun, wearing a habit and rosary beads, my first thought isn't that the Church needs to do something about its bank robbing Nuns problem.

...
Lion IRC I understand the outrage you would feel as a believer thinking that someone would occupy a pulpit and accept a salary that way.

I would have thought atheists would be outraged. They are bringing atheists into disrepute, not priests.

You seem to be making the mistake of thinking that an atheist would care about whether atheists have repute. It's like you don't understand that there's not a cabal of atheists getting together in a conclave putting together platforms of dogma and marching orders for the rank and file members. Honestly Lion IRC, you've been around here long enough to know better. The only thing we atheists have in common is that we don't buy the claims people make about their invisible friends. Other than that we can be as variegated as any other random group of human beings.

If an atheist robs a bank it doesn't mean atheism is about robbing banks. If an atheist is a serial murderer it doesn't mean that atheism is about serial murder. If an atheist works as pastor of the First Baptist Church it doesn't mean that atheists are pastors or that all atheists are into doing things that they don't believe in.

Have you ever in your life stayed with a job that you absolutely hated but knew that your family would suffer if you just quit? Did you ever suck it up and do your job for a company that you felt was ripping people off because you couldn't just leave? For many of these non-believing clergy this is exactly the situation they are in. It's just a job, and when they can do so with a clear conscience they will give it up. And more to the point they are not causing disrepute precisely because they are not making it known that they no longer believe. That's kind of the point.

I would think Christians would be more enraged by obvious fraudsters such as Ken Hamm, Crefio A Dollar, Pat Robertson and their ilk than garden variety clergy who no longer believe in any god or gods and are simply trying to find a way to bow out of a profession they have become imprisoned in. At least they're trying to stop the dishonesty.

But I haven't been a Christian for over 20 years, so maybe I've lost touch.

 

[ideologyhunter]

I'm with atheist local 37, and we caught our rep -- our rep-- listening to a podcast on a Joel Osteen Inspirational Rechargeable Sound Cube. Caused a scandal that still hasn't stopped reverberating. My jockeys got in a knot, I can tell you.

 

[atrib]

I dont think you read my post carefully enough.
I said "masquerading".
Atheists pretending to be priests.

I understood just fine. You seem to be outraged that some priests who lose their faith continue to live their lives as priests for some period of time. While they are no longer believers, they continue to provide the services they are required to provide as priests, with none being the wiser.

If you want to join the dots to other examples of things which aren't what they seem, so be it.

You know, if I see a bank robber fleeing from the bank disguised as a Nun, wearing a habit and rosary beads, my first thought isn't that the Church needs to do something about its bank robbing Nuns problem.

I'm not sure what your point is. If I saw a person dressed as a nun holding up a bank, I would assume the outfit was being used as a disguise, and that the person probably wasn't a priest. What does this have to do with someone who became a priest because they felt a religious calling, and later lost their faith but continued to provide the services he was tasked with as a priest.

...
Lion IRC I understand the outrage you would feel as a believer thinking that someone would occupy a pulpit and accept a salary that way.

I would have thought atheists would be outraged. They are bringing atheists into disrepute, not priests.

Why would atheists be outraged? Its not like atheists share a common worldview that unites them and imbues them with common principles. And, as I have pointed out, its not like a priest who carries on with his duties despite losing his faith is perpetrating grave harm on the community.

 

[funinspace]

I'm with atheist local 37, and we caught our rep -- our rep-- listening to a podcast on a Joel Osteen Inspirational Rechargeable Sound Cube. Caused a scandal that still hasn't stopped reverberating. My jockeys got in a knot, I can tell you.

Does that mean I should secretly get rid of all my Biblical reading material, that I collected while faking my faith? I don't want to get in trouble with The Union.

 

[ideologyhunter]

Just say 3 Hail Satans and do something mean to a kitten. (Twist its nose, I mean. We aren't old school these days.)

 

[Angry Floof]

Just say 3 Hail Satans and do something mean to a kitten. (Twist its nose, I mean. We aren't old school these days.)

Speak for yourself. I'm a fundamentalist and your liberal interpretation is leading you away from Truth! I will rigorously not pray for you.

 

[Rhea]

Religion will still be around imo, which would perhaps be of a somewhat different nature as a majority mainstream than to that of Christianity that many are usually familiar with (Jesus and the Gospel narrative). Apparently a type that may be much more 'acceptably preferred & "tolerated",' meaning: This emerging religion must have the ability to be adaptable & adjustable, the facility to add new things like philosophies, even fashionable trends, as well as taking out old things like certain biblical narratives, which would then ... not have any conflict with that individuals' way of life - according to personal taste, so to speak

An "Open-Source Religion," if you will.

A One-World-Religion some people term it as. In a normal everyday discussion, all sorts (believers and non-believers), would no doubt have talked and are talking about this, simply out of personal interest & curiosity - not with the view/or putting aside the view of someone who is thinking to make an argument, for a religious debate etc.. BUT as a serious thought or pondering... like having ideas that 'ALL religions becoming one-religion ' may be a good thing in their eyes. A "united religion" which also comes with the topic as a good conversation to come about, simply by wondering and asking "where does religion go from here?" in the future to come.

I tried to sentence diagram this post.

 

[atrib]

Religion will still be around imo, which would perhaps be of a somewhat different nature as a majority mainstream than to that of Christianity that many are usually familiar with (Jesus and the Gospel narrative). Apparently a type that may be much more 'acceptably preferred & "tolerated",' meaning: This emerging religion must have the ability to be adaptable & adjustable, the facility to add new things like philosophies, even fashionable trends, as well as taking out old things like certain biblical narratives, which would then ... not have any conflict with that individuals' way of life - according to personal taste, so to speak

An "Open-Source Religion," if you will.

A One-World-Religion some people term it as. In a normal everyday discussion, all sorts (believers and non-believers), would no doubt have talked and are talking about this, simply out of personal interest & curiosity - not with the view/or putting aside the view of someone who is thinking to make an argument, for a religious debate etc.. BUT as a serious thought or pondering... like having ideas that 'ALL religions becoming one-religion ' may be a good thing in their eyes. A "united religion" which also comes with the topic as a good conversation to come about, simply by wondering and asking "where does religion go from here?" in the future to come.

I tried to sentence diagram this post.

View attachment 34101

You are a much nicer person than I am. And way more patient.

 

[Learner]

"I tried to sentence diagram this post."

Nevermind, whatever you tried to portray here, I'm sure you tried your best.

 

[Rhea]

"I tried to sentence diagram this post."

Nevermind, whatever you tried to portray here, I'm sure you tried your best.

Sorry. Didn’t mean to be obscure. It’s from English class:

Sentence diagram
Description
A sentence diagram is a pictorial representation of the grammatical structure of a sentence.

 

[Learner]

Sorry. Didn’t mean to be obscure. It’s from English class:

Sentence diagram
Description
A sentence diagram is a pictorial representation of the grammatical structure of a sentence.

No worries, no offense taken either. I should be able to handle it - sarcasm, mocking insults or being called funny jokey names. Best take it as a bit of banter, when 'it's not an argument'

 

[DrZoidberg]

Are you familiar with The Clergy Project, a support group for those who have left the ministry. I've met Dan Barker a couple of times when he spoke at Atlanta Freethought, but it's been years. I think Dan is one of the most outspoken, former members of the clergy. Was his story in the book?

https://clergyproject.org/former-believer-resources/

When I was searching for the clergy project, I came across some crazy Christian site that thinks it must be the end times since so many members of the clergy are becoming agnostics and atheists. Maybe it's the end times for religion.

I think Atheos is a member IIRC.

Religion will still be around imo, which would perhaps be of a somewhat different nature as a majority mainstream than to that of Christianity that many are usually familiar with (Jesus and the Gospel narrative). Apparently a type that may be much more 'acceptably preferred & "tolerated",' meaning: This emerging religion must have the ability to be adaptable & adjustable, the facility to add new things like philosophies, even fashionable trends, as well as taking out old things like certain biblical narratives, which would then ... not have any conflict with that individuals' way of life - according to personal taste, so to speak

An "Open-Source Religion," if you will.

A One-World-Religion some people term it as. In a normal everyday discussion, all sorts (believers and non-believers), would no doubt have talked and are talking about this, simply out of personal interest & curiosity - not with the view/or putting aside the view of someone who is thinking to make an argument, for a religious debate etc.. BUT as a serious thought or pondering... like having ideas that 'ALL religions becoming one-religion ' may be a good thing in their eyes. A "united religion" which also comes with the topic as a good conversation to come about, simply by wondering and asking "where does religion go from here?" in the future to come.



(No surprise that the bible agrees with the same, i.e., Christianity as we now know and knew then, may not be so much around visibly where it once was in the world. Similar to your take on the end of religion, the "End times for Christianity," I suppose would be how some like to see it)

(Just remembered steve asked similar questions on his thread, 'what will replace religion?' This could be more suited for that thread)

Of course Christianity is here to stay. It will never go away. It'll just adapt and change to fit the new world, as it always has. It keeps dying and getting reborn all the time. It's not a bug. It's a feature.

Initially Judaism was about royal propaganda and national expansion and ethnic cleansing of enemies. At this point it was all about politics. If the Jewish kings conquered enemies then whatever that king did God approved of. If they lost battles, then they must have sinned. Then Judea became a Persian subject. Then suddenly it became about spiritual matters. After the Greeks invaded Palestine (Judea) and Jewish life became highly precarious Judaism stopped being about the collective faith of a community. Then suddenly being Jewish meant having a personal relationship with God. Roman cosmopolitanism led to Jewish ideas spreading and now suddenly God didn't even care that you were a pure blood Jew. The spiritual aspect had completely supplanted the political aspect of Judaism. We got Christianity. Constantine wanted it as a imperial religion. Now suddenly the fact that Christians couldn't agree on much became a problem. We got the Vulgate Bible. He shoehorned Christianity into the existing pagan structure and rituals to make the transition easier. We got Catholicism. Gutenberg invents the printing press. Now suddenly Christians realize that the Bible doesn't at all say what the Catholic priests have been saying it does. We get fundamentalism (a completely new thing). The Bible goes from being a bunch of pithy discussion points intended to stimulate rewarding conversations, to a manual for life. The modern industrial economy completely trashes the old agrarian social patterns and norms. We get the more flexible and aggressive evangelical Christianity.

 

[Rhea]

Sorry. Didn’t mean to be obscure. It’s from English class:

Sentence diagram
Description
A sentence diagram is a pictorial representation of the grammatical structure of a sentence.

No worries, no offense taken either. I should be able to handle it - sarcasm, mocking insults or being called funny jokey names. Best take it as a bit of banter, when 'it's not an argument'

I was mostly serious actually. You post was not comprehensible. Clarification would be helpful if you want anyone to know what you said. You have so many nested sub-clauses, dangling modifiers, double negatives and cutesy fluff that people are unable to detect your point.

 

[Learner]

No worries, no offense taken either. I should be able to handle it - sarcasm, mocking insults or being called funny jokey names. Best take it as a bit of banter, when 'it's not an argument'

I was mostly serious actually. You post was not comprehensible. Clarification would be helpful if you want anyone to know what you said. You have so many nested sub-clauses, dangling modifiers, double negatives and cutesy fluff that people are unable to detect your point.

But of course you were serious. I can see intention, but consider your post acknowledged!

I got a reponse from Doc Zoidberg anyway - luckily he was able to decipher that post at least, hopefully and assuming this did 'not rerquire' too much effort.

 

[Lion IRC]

I understood your post quite well Learner.
Open source religion...religion Lite...lukewarm, post-modern, Laodicean religion.

Polite people typically just ask..."what did you mean by xyz Learner?"
Or they politely say..."I'm sorry, Learner, I didn't understand what you were trying to say". Or they politely just overlook the post rather than stooping to make some vulgar and petty ad hominem because they can't resist being petty and rude.

...to one of the most polite, friendly and civil members of this forum.