The Awkwardness of Free-Thinking
What do you think about “free-thinking?” This has long been a term that just seemed like nonsense to me, and I knew it was nonsense when I thought about raising children this way. As I’ve read St. Thomas and encyclicals from Pope Pius X and Pope Leo XIII about Modernist thought, I’ve come to understand this term better, and understand better why the Church rejects that idea. See my latest article at Integrated Catholic Life (TM).
A “freethinker” is defined as one who forms opinions on the basis of reason independently of authority, especially one who denies religious dogma. Perhaps unbridled intellectual freedom sounds seductive at first, but is this really a good idea?
Consider children. Truth is basically simple and if an idea wouldn’t make sense at a fundamental level to a child, then the idea is probably nonsense. For instance, imagine explaining to a five-year-old that he has free reign to think and conclude whatever he wants, permission to be an absolute free-thinker. Sound good?
“William, go for it! You are your own authority. Explore all possibilities independently, pick your own symbols, decide for yourself what is right and wrong, and try anything without restraint.”
What would William do?
Read the rest here.
Category: Church History, Modernism, Theology
Subscribe
If you enjoyed this article, subscribe to receive more just like it.
Will all the religions to choose from, each believer must make his or her own decision which one (if any) to follow, so every human being alive — Catholic, Protestant, Muslim, atheist, and so on — ultimately faces the challenge that William must face. That’s the price of free will.
True, Rob.
Where have you arrived thus far, if you don’t mind answering. I seem to remember that you are more agnostic than atheist. Or am I remembering wrong?
Did you read the article? About authority? It’s kind of “truth-seeker” vs. “free-thinker.” It doesn’t seem anyone can arrive at truth by absolute free-thinking.
Stacy,
I agreed with you the first few paragraphs. Especially when you made clear no one could be a complete free-thinker if he/she wants to be part of society.
However, I stopped reading after 1/3 of your article and I think you know why. I agree a true free-thinker is undesirable but you try to guide people to the other side of the spectrum, to organised religion. Organised religion is all rule- and regulation-based and therefore the exact opposite of free-thinking. You’re basically saying:
“Stop thinking for yourself and stop making choices for yourself. Follow me and all your thoughts will be thought for you and all choices will be made for you”. And an increasing number of people is no longer willing to surrender themselves like that. As a reaction they are more likely to do exactly what you said the parents of little William would do, possibly harming their child in the process.
Edward,
Glad we agree on the first part. “Free-thinking” never made much sense to me even before I was Catholic.
I challenge you to read the rest. Or read the documents I linked. Edward, remember, you live where authentic Catholic doctrine is not taught.
“Stop thinking for yourself and stop making choices for yourself. Follow me and all your thoughts will be thought for you and all choices will be made for you”.
^^^That up there is a poor and false representation of Catholic teaching for children. It isn’t anything like that. If you were right, you’d have an excellent point, one that follows from the first third of the article. But you misunderstand.
I’ll explain a little of what really struck me as awesome when I realized how my children were learning about themselves as young Catholics.
Virtue! Compassion, courage, determination, fidelity, generosity, graciousness, humility, integrity, justice, loyalty, modesty, patience, prudence, reverence, sincerity, temperance.
They learn … (hold on, my 8 year old is jumping in my face thrilled at the idea of making my favorite dinner when she’s allowed to cook! no kidding) … to give and to think of others. To think beyond *themselves.*
Now I’m not saying that I’m a better parent than anyone else, but when raised steeped in these efforts to practice virtue, admit vice, ask and accept forgiveness, help each other, stay together no matter what, I see how kids are guided towards what is good. And that makes them free.
Truth-seeking leads to freedom.
I imagine that if you are honest, you do some of the very same things with your little girl because it’s natural. Does what I’ve said make sense to you at all? Do you disagree with what I’ve described.
Stacy,
“I imagine that if you are honest, you do some of the very same things with your little girl because it’s natural. Does what I’ve said make sense to you at all? Do you disagree with what I’ve described.”
You’re absolutely right. I do teach my daughter several of these things. I just don’t see how religion has anything to do with all of this.
For example, you say Catholicism teaches your children compassion. Now I don’t know how things are in Massachusetts (haven’t been to New England in a while) but when I see the “compassion” between religions (including Catholicism) or between religions and atheists I’d say “compassion” is the word I would least think of. “Hatred” would come to mind sooner.
Same with “Justice”. When I think back of Easter last year, when one of the Cardinals said on international live television no cases of sexual abuse within the Catholic church existed and each and every claim made was an attempt to damage the mother church, “justice” wasn’t the first thing I thought of. “Loathing”, yes. “Grief”, most definately. But the only thing I would ever have linked that to justice was if that Cardinal had been struck by lighting there and then, proving your God didn’t quite agree with him.
And I know it might seem petty of me to bring up the sexual abuse scandal again but especially when talking about children I find it a subject that cannot be addressed enough. No way, even if I was Catholic, I would leave my daughter with someone of the clergy for even an hour. But what might be more illustrating for you is my husband thinks about this exactly the same and he used to be a priest. Even he doesn’t trust the clergy anymore and he was one of them.
Also, I don’t know how it is in the US but in Europe it will take the Catholic church a long time to recover from all of this, if ever. The reputation of the Catholic church wasn’t that great in Europe to begin with at the beginning of this century and right now the majority of the people won’t believe a priest if he claims grass is green or water is wet.
“Stop thinking for yourself and stop making choices for yourself. Follow me and all your thoughts will be thought for you and all choices will be made for you”.
This, by the way, is not the way I feel about Catholicism. At least, not about Catholicism alone. I feel this way about every organised religion and this was exactly the feeling I got from your article. I know you didn’t write this or even meant this because this is not the way you see your religion but it is the feeling I get from you article. If I read in your article: “stop free thinking and join the Catholic church” in my mind’s eye I see rows and rows of boys and girls, dressed in black, kneeling while reciting psalms. You have no idea of the horror I feel when “seeing” that.
“They learn … (hold on, my 8 year old is jumping in my face thrilled at the idea of making my favorite dinner when she’s allowed to cook! no kidding) … to give and to think of others. To think beyond *themselves.*”
Somehow I find it hard to believe she’s actually jumping in your face at the exact moment you’re telling me your children learn to think about others, but I like the touch.
I know what you mean, though. My husband turns 38 next month so my daughter and I went shopping last weekend for a birthday present. My daughter was so exited (she’s entering that age she understands what a suprise is and stuff) that I’m glad it wasn’t his real present we went to buy because before she went to bed on Saturday she already spoiled the suprise and told her dad all about the gift he would be getting from her.
Anyway, like I said before, it’s unlikely we’ll ever see eye to eye on most subjects since our reference points are opposite to each other. I can agree with a lot of things you teach your children because I teach my daughter the same but there are also a lot of things I teach my daughter the exact opposite. If I ever hear my daughter ask for forgiveness when she has done nothing wrong (and whatever I determine “wrong” will be quite different from what you consider to be wrong) there will be hell to pay. If I ever see my daughter “turning the other cheek” she and me will have a serious heart to heart. Yes, I want her to be a nice and pleasant person but I also want her to be a strong person; a strong woman people will respect and, if needed, fear. And I certainly will not teach her she has to stay with whoever she ends up with no matter what.
Edward, I’ll respond tomorrow (late here). For now, thank you for your candidness and willingness to engage. One thing I detest about the internet is that it removes faces, pretty much.
If you and I were actually talking face to face, I have no doubt we’d be friendly and we’d find some way to talk without tearing each other down. I’m truly interested in what you have to say, for what that is worth. And you seem to be of the same mind.
To turn one’s back on God because of His followers is not the best of moves. I can confidently say this because as a young man serving as an altar boy in an Episcopalian church, hypocrisy was the impetus that sent me fleeing from the church.
How many people judge God by His adherents? How many people give up on faith because the religious are flawed, in particular, the leadership? I was one and no doubt, we number in the millions. Moreover, as evidenced by recent studies, the number is only increasing.
For an extended period of my life, I was angry with my mother. In my view, she wasn’t the most committed of Christians. I was eighteen or so when I made a promise. I swore that if my mother didn’t stop her verbal abuse, I would cut her out of my life.
Regrettably, she didn’t stop and I honored my vow. I also gave up on the church. At the time, I couldn’t fathom a mother treating a son so appallingly. Especially if she professed love for her son. The love between a mother and child is perfect, I thought, and I wasn’t about to forgive an imperfect demonstration of that love. The hell with her, and that sentiment clouded our relationship for years.
It hurt her terribly and I’m ashamed of myself.
It was only when I began to learn about God did my heart change concerning my mother. I was holding her up to an impossible standard. Perfection? God is the only perfect being and perfection is the hallmark of His creation. To expect perfect love from a flawed woman was a lamentable and naïve mistake on my part. My mother had been hijacked by booze. So it goes in terms of people judging people and thus by proxy, judging God. It’s impossible to not be disappointed if one expects Christians to act in supreme harmony with God’s teaching. Forgive their failings and know that God has none.
I would hope that God’s followers would be wonderful examples of faith, but I know that isn’t the case. As human beings we’re basically good but sin, hatred and destruction are hands we play quite well. However, within our nature, hope, goodness, mercy and forgiveness also reign. Obviously, we’re not the most reliable beacons of righteousness but we have our moments. That’s why it’s critical to go to the source, the wellspring of truth. Jesus’ life, death and resurrection and His teachings should be the criteria for choosing to believe in Him or not.
Geek observation. Feel free to ignore.
x + y = 5.
Solve for x and y.
Answer: there aren’t enough degrees of freedom in the system. There is an INFINITE number of solutions for x and y (x = 2, y = 3)(x = -1, y = 6) etc.
There is no solution to the problem until one is given a constraint.
Let x = 6.
There is an answer: y = -1.
That’s my framework for trying to wrap my head around free thinkers. They’re trying to run on glare ice, slipping and falling on their faces, getting no where.
Mathematicians and other grown ups require constraints. We arrive at truth, at certitude, under constraint. I think that’s why were so happy.
You love to use extreme examples to represent your false beliefs. Such as allowing a 5 year-old full reign to conclude whatever it wants. Free thought has nothing to do with allowing children to function autonomously without parental supervision.
And if you think religion is the perfect substitute for free thinking, then why don’t you take a look at the World Trade Center. Oh wait, you can’t because it’s gone. Science flies people into space. Religion flies people into buildings.
My path to spiritual certitude was illuminated by the dual lanterns of faith and reason. Those of the atheistic or agnostic ilk who suggest an incompatibility between the two are sadly mistaken. Faith without reason can become superstition; reason without faith can morph into truths that are subjective and relative. True discovery requires the complement of both.
One point needs to be emphasized. There are as many varied and extraordinary paths to God as there are people on this planet. To find the right course requires nothing more than will and commitment. And to the extent people do the work and elect to not believe in God, their decision has to be respected. It’s unfortunate but God gave them that freedom.
Life wrecker, I have a nit to pick with you on the World Trade Center. It’s sort of a sore spot with me.
I’d like to teach you that when a Catholic uses the term martyr, we refer to a heroic act whereby one of us gets murdered for what we believe. Catholic martyrdom is a purely passive event, it is something we’d prefer to avoid. But for others, being a martyr is the act of killing other people using methods that are so lethal that there’s a pretty good chance the martyr himself will perish.
See the difference? It’s hard to spot at first. As G.K. Chesterton said, there is a very fine line between orthodoxy and heresy.
I know the free thinkers and late night comedians sort of wink and say, “yeah those Christians want to kill you” and everything. They’re playing you. They think you’re a sucker. But now after reading my comment you know you’ve been lied to. You must stand on your own two feet from now on, Life wrecker.
I think life wrecker was pointing out that the world trade center was destroyed in the name of religion and god.
The people who destroyed the towers did so because they think their religion and god are right and are the only ones that should be followed.
So let’s leave the martyrs out of it and see it for what it was at it’s base level.
Jeff,
You must live in a 17th century world of Newtonian mechanics, where Set Theory, Imaginary Numbers and Chaos Theory do not exist; where everything is known and nothing is unknown. Fascinating. Stacy seems to live in the same world.
The anti free thinkers seems to think that free thinking is about dismissing EVERYTHING. That is simply not the case, at least not to me.
I am a freethinker, and always have been, due to this I am an atheist. Yet I still have morality, and values, often in line with those of christians. I find math to be true as it is based on a natural set of values I can see.
Freethinking has led me to believe in gravity, chemistry, radiology, geology, etc. It has also led me to dismiss tales of talking snakes, a wooden boat that had 50,000+ animals on it, and turning H20 into ETOH. To me it’s a simple and rational choice.
As for marcus:
I will dismiss god based on his followers. God said man was created in his image, often times his followers are hardly examples of morality and peace. Furthermore I have yet to see conclusive evidence of god, yet I see the fallacies of his followers everyday. I see religion in politics, creationism museums with people along side dinosaurs, I see violent acts of genocide in the name of god, etc… I see all these things done in the name of god by his followers, but I have yet to see god him/herself.
Regardless, I don’t also feel the need to constantly belittle people and tell them how foolish they are for believing in god, yet god’s followers tell me the same thing for not believing in god. I only step up when my beliefs are attacked, or my life is changed because someone of religion wants to impose their beliefs on me or my family.
RG,
“The anti free thinkers seems to think that free thinking is about dismissing EVERYTHING. That is simply not the case, at least not to me.”
So you’re only a partial free-thinker? Then why do you not think freely about all things?
“Yet I still have morality, and values, often in line with those of christians.”
So you do accept some bodies of knowledge? I have a particular irritation with people who pick and chose from Christianity as if it were some buffet table spread before them. It’s a similar feeling I have when my children want to raid my kitchen and take what they like, without any appreciation for how things got to be that way.
“I find math to be true as it is based on a natural set of values I can see.”
Not all of it? Do you discredit anything abstract? I’m pretty sure you never saw zero or infinity, imaginary numbers, or perfect circles.
“Freethinking has led me to believe in gravity, chemistry, radiology, geology, etc.”
That’s not free-thinking, that’s considering an already existing body of knowledge that predates you, finding the propositions reasonable and assenting to what others have already derived.
“It has also led me to dismiss tales of talking snakes, a wooden boat that had 50,000+ animals on it, and turning H20 into ETOH. To me it’s a simple and rational choice.”
And that’s because you didn’t try to think, you just listened to someone else who said it was nonsense. You should at least know what you are rejecting or arguing against to actually be able to do either intellectually and honestly.
You could start with God. Do you even know how Christians define that “word?” I’m guessing not. Simple challenge.
wow Stacy, way to prove Reasonable Gentlemans point for him.
Alan, you don’t even know what proof is.
and again……..
Stacy- your argument holds no water. You are saying I am taking Christian values and choosing the ones I want. I am able to choose my life choices independent of religion. By your logic I am also a muslim, a Buddhist, a taoist, a Wiccan, etc. because I share some values from a religion does not make me a ‘partial freethinker’
I also believe in science as It is provable. Fairy tales and bible stories are not. Geology tells the earths history along with paleontology much better than oral tales passed around campfires by illiterate sheep herders…………
Your final fallacy is trying to use your beliefs as evidence that mine are wrong. You can’t use the bible to define the bible. What exactly is wrong with a free thinker? Why is a moral person who is free from the chains of fear? why is a person that questions things such a heathen in your eyes? You are a mother, I can’t imagine you want your kids to have no backbone or quantitive reasoning skills.
RG,
I defined free-thinking. You said that wasn’t right. As Alan can attest, this is the point when I ask you to define your terms. If free-thinking isn’t really free-thinking, then what is it? I’ve always thought that term a bit silly.
You are able to choose your life choices, but that in no way presupposes that your choices are consistent and logical. If you pick and choose at will, you really don’t have any guiding principles. Or do you? And if so, from what and where are they derived? What are your guiding principles?
And if you do assent to fiduciary knowledge, what determines whether you do that or not?
Finally, what to you constitutes proof. There’s nothing to debate if you don’t even know what you are trying to prove.
Why do you believe science is provable? I’m certain that everything you believe is not a function of having seen it first hand yourself.
“Your final fallacy is trying to use your beliefs as evidence that mine are wrong.”
Huh?
Definition of freethinking/free thought, courtesy of Wikipedia:
“Freethought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds opinions should be formed on the basis of science, logic, and reason, and should not be influenced by authority, tradition, or other dogmas:”
I am proud to call myself a freethinker, not because I am anti religion, but because I seek to find the truth to my existence. I have found many of the answers I am seeking in science, reason, and rationality. This is MY path as a freethinker. I read and enjoy your blog because I enjoy your take on things. I don’t agree with you, but your passion for your beliefs, and security allows you to discuss things without the vile hatred I see from many ‘christians’
Simply put- I think that if a person does not consider themselves a free thinker they are either selling themselves short or are admitting their ignorance is based on a failure to think freely about ideas that differ with from their own. Freethinking is not heresy ☺
“You are able to choose your life choices, but that in no way presupposes that your choices are consistent and logical. If you pick and choose at will, you really don’t have any guiding principles. Or do you? And if so, from what and where are they derived? What are your guiding principles?”
My choices are quite logical to me, I pick and choose what is logical, not what is told to me as logical. Don’t confuse this with being self serving; my choices are also determined by what the effects are in regards to others. I know that stealing, violence, etc… are acts that hurt my community and the world around me. My guiding principles often fall in line with those of Christians. It’s not because I only think freely part time, it’s because I freely think about what is important in life and what is not. What is important to me is being a good neighbor, a good friend, and a positive energy in the world around me. What is not important to me is dedicating my life to someone or some religion that does nothing for me. I have freely thought about my path, and therefore made a path where I can believe what I want without imposing on others health and happiness.
“Why do you believe science is provable? I’m certain that everything you believe is not a function of having seen it first hand yourself. “
You asked a question that I could rephrase and throw back at you about god. However, I’ll take it a step further and explain. Of course I have never been on the moon, and never actually seen a fission reaction. I have seen a body heal from serious wounds; I have seen people die as a result of their wounds. I have seen births, and I have seen gravity. I have also seen consistent geologic processes that are very similar across the 4 continents I have visited. I believe in science very much as many scientists were free thinkers that tried to find the truth to an answer. More so many of these scientists looked for an answer to satisfy curiosity, not to prove a predetermined belief (god). Of course there are exceptions, but theologians and religious people generally are trying to prove their beliefs, not find an objective answer. I’ll also ask why religions is so powerful …. Have you seen a person be resurrected from the dead? Did you see an arc with 160,000 animals on it? Were you actually present when a snake talked to Eve? Of course you weren’t, you merely believe in these orally passed stories. Same think with my views on astronomy. I’ve never been more than 40,000ft above sea level, but that doesn’t mean I don’t believe in the vacuum of space…..
I meant you fallacy was to show I am wrong based on YOUR opinion alone. You can’t define a word with that same word. Your assumption seems to be that freethinkers are baby eating, goat burning, sodomites with no moral direction. This is hardly the case. You in fact show a great deal of freethinking, however your path has lead you to something quite different than mine.
Reasonable Gentleman,
I am a fully observant Catholic, as well as a philosopher of science. I would like you to know that science might not work the way you think it does.
The adventure you describe of a curious freethinker going forth to seek the answer and obtain the truth almost never happens. Inquiry takes place inside the context of a scientific tradition. I emphasize tradition because that is one of the sources that you mentioned was anathema to freethinkers.
In any given scientific era, says the great philosopher of science Thomas Kuhn, the problems to be solved, and the acceptable methods for solving them, do not arise fresh in each generation; the problems have already been defined by what Kuhn calls the dominant paradigm. In fact, if a scientist were to perform a classic experiment, a so-called “exemplar” in the discipline, and if he or she were to come up with an anomalous result, the academic community would presume that the scientist has made a mistake. This is quite the opposite of free thinking. There are definitive boundaries around what may and may not be studied, and what certain answers must be.
Violations of these boundaries are punishable by — dare I say — excommunication of sorts. Witness the controversies and scandals in the global warming domain. Nobody is truly free to critique the received view. In a certain sense, this is as it should be. However, what I’d like to point out here is merely the fact that the reality of day to day science is quite difference from what Wikipedia describes as the ideal of “free thought.”
Something to think about.
Jeff-
We can quibble over the definition of Freethinker. Either way that definition is accurate to my thoughts on the word.
As a philosopher of science how do you feel about the catholic church doing it’s best to eradicate science and other cultures? It seems to me that when someone bans or destroys something it is because they aren’t secure enough in their view to let something coexist with them.
You bring up a great point with Global Warming, it is a theory of sorts, but it sure seems to hold a lot of truth. Most people can agree the climate is changing, the difference is in why it’s changing. I don’t subscribe to the Al Gore view of doom and gloom, but I also think we as a world need to curb our consumption of resources and carbon emissions. To do so would be a hedge against a future of desertification and famine….. If our impact is not as great on the climate as we think we lost nothing, but still acted responsibly towards our children and grandchildren. Unfortunately I see many Christians denounce global warming as some ‘liberal godless scam’
How can a devout christian be so against science yet willingly take part in our era of modern medicine and it’s associated cures? Before science entire cities were decimated by plagues and outbreaks that are considered minor in today’s time. I find many christians to be hugely hypocritical, they denounce science as just an ‘idea’ but when they need an arterial stint, or a blood transfusion they suddenly trust in science…….
Why does ‘freethinking’ scare christians so much? I don’t beleive in god, however I don’t care that you do. As long as I don’t have to live under the scrutiny and laws of the bible I don’t care if you worship a spider. As far as excommunication goes, who cares? Why would someone participate in an idealogy that will kick them out of the group for trying to explore boundaries and rationality? This again goes back to the church’s deplorable history of which hunts.
Giordano Bruno, who postulated the Earth actually rotates around the sun was burned at the stake by the catholic church. I think most people agree now that the earth does indeed revolve around the sun!
Croatia was governed by Catholics until the end of WWII, the group Ustasha, systematically killed of non catholics! Rwanda’s government was ruled by Catholics during the genocide of the 1990, catholic priests and nun were known to have given the location of hiding Tutsis to the Hutu milita, the Tutsis all died horrible deaths at the machetes of the Hutus….. Simply put the fear of ‘freethinking’ has been entrenched in the christian faith and catholic faith for centuries and been responsible for an insane amount of carnage. This is not to say Islam is any better, but it tells me that organized religion is quite poisonous to those that don’t follow the dogma.
Currently we have a huge sex scandal in the church, yet it’s been largely covered up. Churches in today’s society operate with to much immunity to moral law. If the baptist church as a whole was involved in a sex scandal as far reaching as the Catholic Church was you can be assured your priests and political leaders would be calling for the heads of Baptists.
Simply put, freethinking has allowed me to love my neighbor regardless of their views. I don’t think anyone deserved being burned at the stake. I don’t think cities full of people that disagree with me need burned to the ground. I also don’t think people with out my beliefs need to be rounded up into concentration camps and executed. However history has shown me that if I am going to be publicly burned or my family murdered it will likely be at the hands of a religous idealist. That is a sad fact, but a fact all the same.
Of course, while you are a catholic, I am not accusing you of such crimes, but if you give blind faith to a religion you are also telling the world that you partially stand behind this history. unfortunately many christians and catholics can’t speak out because they will be excommunicated. It’s a twisted, vulgar, and unfortunate commentary on how our world works.
RG,
I like you. I hope you’ll stick around. You’ve brought up so many good topics, most of which I definitely want to address. Please check back on Monday! I’ll dive in next week. Thank you for your comment! Have a nice weekend.
Stacy
Ditto… A somewhat civil discourse is always good. While I have obvious opposing views, I’m always open to seeing other people points. Unfortunately with work, education, and life, I don’t have to time to comment 20 times a day like many people here…..
RG,
“Freethought is a philosophical viewpoint that holds opinions should be formed on the basis of science, logic, and reason, and should not be influenced by authority, tradition, or other dogmas:”
It’s this darn definition that is troublesome.
First: It implies that assent to authority or tradition (as Jeff already pointed out) is unreasonable and illogical — yet, that’s exactly what every scientist or any other person undertaking any field of study must necessarily do.
“I am proud to call myself a freethinker, not because I am anti religion, but because I seek to find the truth to my existence. I have found many of the answers I am seeking in science, reason, and rationality.”
I believe you, but you will go further with faith. In your lifetime you will not find the answers about your own existence by reason alone because what caused your existence and the meaning in your life transcends you, necessarily.
“I have found many of the answers I am seeking in science, reason, and rationality. This is MY path as a freethinker.”
Yes, that’s wonderful, but science will only get you so far. **Science** as a discipline can’t even name what makes a scientist.
“I read and enjoy your blog because I enjoy your take on things. I don’t agree with you, but your passion for your beliefs, and security allows you to discuss things without the vile hatred I see from many ‘christians’”
I hope I don’t blow that. You won’t find vile hatred from any Christian who comments here. Plenty of people would jump on that and help that individual out.
“Simply put- I think that if a person does not consider themselves a free thinker they are either selling themselves short or are admitting their ignorance is based on a failure to think freely about ideas that differ with from their own. Freethinking is not heresy ☺”
It depends. We can explain to you the logical proofs of God’s existence and how they are not different from many scientific proofs, but it’s futile unless you are really interested. Faith is not unreasonable. Many people who summarily reject it don’t realize what the actual arguments and definitions are. It’s quite enriching to work through though.
“I know that stealing, violence, etc… are acts that hurt my community and the world around me. My guiding principles often fall in line with those of Christians.”
We say that is because we are all made by the same, and only, Creator. We all have a shared humanity.
“It’s not because I only think freely part time, it’s because I freely think about what is important in life and what is not.”
But you have not done it without guidance from authority, not if you really think about what got you here today.
“What is important to me is being a good neighbor, a good friend, and a positive energy in the world around me.”
We call that the natural law. There’s much more to it.
“What is not important to me is dedicating my life to someone or some religion that does nothing for me.”
Fair enough.
“I believe in science very much as many scientists were free thinkers that tried to find the truth to an answer.”
Do you know the history of science, particularly of modern science? It was greatly influenced by the Christian psychology, the mindset, that the world is ordered because it is created by a Creator, that time had a beginning which continues forward to an end, that man had the intelligence to even search and find answers to his existence because God made him to do so. These are all Christian tenets. In other cultures for all of mankind’s history, science did not experience the birth that it did in Christian Western Europe. There were jumps and starts, but it never gelled into the enterprise unto itself that it is today. The right worldview did not exist for it to do so.
“More so many of these scientists looked for an answer to satisfy curiosity, not to prove a predetermined belief (god).”
Catholics don’t do that either. Science is a chip off the ol’ block, if you will. God created the world, so man is supposed to study the world and expect that he will be able to understand more and more of it over time. That doesn’t prove God, but we see God in science like a reader sees the author in the book he reads.
“Of course there are exceptions, but theologians and religious people generally are trying to prove their beliefs, not find an objective answer.”
Oh, that is a very serious misrepresentation of Catholicism. We very, very, very much believe in objective truth. You have to understand the definitions of God. God is The Objective Truth. I can’t stress enough that to really address this, you must understand what you are arguing against. It’s a good thing, it’s Beauty and Truth.
“I’ll also ask why religions is so powerful …. Have you seen a person be resurrected from the dead?”
It’s reasonable to believe that the early Christians saw that Christ rose from the dead. Why else would all those people have been willingly martyred for something they really did not see or believe? That is the more unreasonable conclusions.
There is no shortage of miracles in Catholic history either, we have some pretty cool saints. I’m friends with a young family right now who is involved in the canonization process for a saint. Their one year old son was actually stillborn and dead for 61 minutes while a large number of people in their parish prayed and asked for the intercession of the candidate for sainthood. The baby’s heart started beating right as the doctors were calling the time of death. He’s perfectly healthy today – he physically had no heartbeat for an hour. Still, that’s not considered a miracle, but an “alleged miracle.” There is an extensive process to prove it with evidence and testimony, that lasts for years.
“Did you see an arc with 160,000 animals on it? Were you actually present when a snake talked to Eve? Of course you weren’t, you merely believe in these orally passed stories.”
Right, and there is less historical evidence that Aristotle existed than Christ and I believe that he did. It’s reasonable.
“Same think with my views on astronomy. I’ve never been more than 40,000ft above sea level, but that doesn’t mean I don’t believe in the vacuum of space…..”
OK.
“Your assumption seems to be that freethinkers are baby eating, goat burning, sodomites with no moral direction.”
No, just not fully formed in their intellectual process. I’m OK with free-thinking within proper limits, again as Jeff explained. But that’s not really free-thinking, it’s guided and disciplined thinking with an open mind and a confidence that you can sort through sense and nonsense. As I said in the article, to absolutely “free-think” a geologist could say that land didn’t exist, and he’s cease to be a geologist.
I agree with you, there may be a lot similarities between us. An assent in faith — if you understand what it really means — is like realizing that you are only wading in an ocean of knowledge that is calling you to dive in and explore.
(Man, I just kill myself with the imagery sometimes!)
I love this quote:
“Christianity has not been tried and found wanting; it has been found difficult and not tried.” Gilbert K. Chesterton
Whoa — long. Sorry.