Quebecers and Their Supposed Christian Faith

[Bonam]

Assuming that I understand what you mean by "embrace the doctrines of their religions in whole", I would prefer they say that they're non-Christians who only happen to like bits of the Bible rather then be Christians who only happen to like bits of the Bible. In any case, I'd prefer for them to not "embrace the doctrines of their religions in whole", because I'd prefer to live near nice flowery liberal Christians rather than near ones who are consistent in their praise of the Bible (i.e., they like the nasty bits as well).

It's silly because the Bible is normally accepted as the highest authority when it comes to matters concerning Christian belief. So when a Christian doesn't believe in, let's say, the virgin birth, hell, the miracles of Jesus, etc. they can never seem to give a reason as to why they don't. Maybe a better example would involve the Ten Commandments: "so-and-so" only thinks stealing is wrong because God forbids it in Deuteronomy in the Ten Commandments, but working on the Sabbath is okay even though that would be a violation of that version of the Ten Commandments as well. To make a practice of doing things like that are obviously silly.

I'm not sure I really understand your position. So what you find disagreeable is people identifying as Christians while ignoring parts of the bible? Even though these semi-Christians are the people you prefer to surround yourself with? Just not really sure what the point you are trying to make (if any) is...

[bleeding heart]

So when a Christian doesn't believe in, let's say, the virgin birth, hell, the miracles of Jesus, etc. they can never seem to give a reason as to why they don't.

I have a slight interest in this topic as well, because my parents fit into this mold. They identify as Christians, they go to church every Sunday, and are involved in various church activities (charitable events and fund-raising....the latter because the Canadian Anglican Church is in massive financial trouble and decline).

That is, my father, the Christian, flatly disbelieves in the miracles, in the virgin birth....and doesn't, in fact, believe in the Divinity of....Jesus Himself!

According to almost-universal Christian doctrine, this last thought alone disqualifies one from being termed a "Christian."

To my Dad, Jesus was this really excellent Rabbi, who preached what might be termed a "radical love" for humanity....and whose long-term influence is not only because of the vagaries of religious and political power, but because of the sheer resonance of what was relayed by the man.

But perhaps most important to my folks is the sense of a shared community of people worshipping the symbol of human moral perfection.

To me, this sounds a little more like Quakerism than the Anglican religion of a Canadian Conservative. But I see little to object to, frankly.

[dickwhitman]

REMOVED

Edited July 6, 2016 by dickwhitman

[Bonam]

It might be more correct to say that it's their affection for the Bible I find disagreeable. I'm not really trying to make a point, I was just explaining why I think this very liberal form of Christianity is silly. To be a little more clear: I'd prefer no one like the Bible. Period. I won't get into why I don't like it, since it's not what the thread's about, nor is it wise to start unnecessary discussions of religion on the internet. However, that is not to say I prefer people take it seriously either.

If I'm still a little unclear about my position than just understand I'm not big on religion.

Neither am I. I am an atheist, as are many other posters on this board, in fact. Perhaps the majority, actually. In my opinion, the kind of Christians you describe are preferable to the zealous ones; they are making progress, slowly freeing themselves of the shackles of religion. The less people identify as religious, and the less religious are the people that identify as religious, the closer we come to a rational world. It is a process that should be allowed to happen gradually and naturally, as more and more people realize that religion has less and less to offer them. There is no point railing against the religious, as that only engenders in them a bunker mentality, making them cling harder to something that, without adversity, they may have simply left behind on their own.

I agree that there is little to object to in the scenario you present, but keep in mind that the Bible isn't all nice and flowery. Religious communities can regress socially, no matter how nice they are now.

The quickest way to make them less nice is to make them feel threatened. Let religion slowly die off on its own.

[bleeding heart]

I agree that there is little to object to in the scenario you present, but keep in mind that the Bible isn't all nice and flowery. Religious communities can regress socially, no matter how nice they are now. For example the Middle-east used to be more liberal and progressive than Europe with respect to all kinds of things. I'll leave it at that.

Oh, hey, you're (if I may use the term) preaching to the choir. I'm an atheist.

But I'm with Bonam. Liberal, diluted religious belief is not an issue for me at all.

And if it's to the point in which a "believer" denies the very Divinity of Christ...well, that's a monotheistic religion actively turning into something else.

Edited November 7, 2013 by bleeding heart

[August1991]

To return to the OP Dick, you should ask your question of all Canadians - not just Quebecers.

I'm an American, atheist, and committed secularist. I'm wanting to know why it is so many Quebecers are supposedly Catholic and/or Christian, and yet are big proponents of causes like gay marriage and having a secular government? How do they also disbelieve in creationism to such a large degree ([/size]

Most Canadians are Catholic.

I posted this above but let me go into more detail:

Pierre Trudeau - Catholic

Joe Clark - Catholic

John Turner - Catholic

Brian Mulroney - Catholic

Jean Chretien - Catholic

Paul Martin - Catholic

Stephen Harper - Protestant

Canada's first Catholic federal PM was John Thompson, an MP from Nova Scotia, elected in 1893. Indeed, Ontario's first Roman Catholic PM was elected in 1867!

----

IMV, Canada's accepting of minorities is due to our Catholicsm, or Protestants willing to vote for Catholics. IMHO, enough right-handed Canadians have always been willing to vote for a left-handed candidate.

[dickwhitman]

REMOVED

Edited July 6, 2016 by dickwhitman

[ReeferMadness]

Regardless, Quebec's ethnic cleansing of religion has left that province in atrophy for decades.

Ridiculous hyperbole.

[ReeferMadness]

I'm an American, atheist, and committed secularist. I'm wanting to know why it is so many Quebecers are supposedly Catholic and/or Christian, and yet are big proponents of causes like gay marriage and having a secular government? How do they also disbelieve in creationism to such a large degree (http://www.huffingtonpost.ca/2012/09/06/believe-in-evolution_n_1861373.html)? How are these so-called Christians also proponents of the PQ secular charter (which is an idiotic idea in my view), which has a quite obvious Catholic and/or Christian bias? Are their supposed Christian beliefs responsible for their views toward the bias? On paper, they don't seem very Christian at all. I can't find the statistic, but aren't some whopping majority of Quebecers Christian? I used to have a friend in high school from Quebec, but he was an atheist as well. Are they really Catholic, or do they just have some attachment to Catholic identity, but not the doctrine?

So, dick, I have a question for you.

The US is a modern, advanced country that owes a lot to science and technology. To what do you attribute the large population of fundamentalist Christians who seem to think they can pick and choose which science they will accept?

Edited November 11, 2013 by ReeferMadness

[August1991]

Surely that only means that Canadians don't have any sectarian tendencies? Or perhaps that only some fringe element of Canadian society has them?

Historically, many WASP Canadians have been willing to vote for a Roman Catholic candidate. But Canada is also a largely Catholic country - even among anglophones.

-----

Canada has regional divides, but it also has linguistic and religious divides. Many people in the West are plain Lutheran protestant. Ostentatious Catholics are different.

We get along, sort of. God knows how but I would frankly prefer a different arrangement. The EU strikes me as civilized: a common money but sovereign states. Like the US at its origins. Dunno.

Edited November 11, 2013 by August1991

[Bonam]

Historically, many WASP Canadians have been willing to vote for a Roman Catholic candidate. But Canada is also a largely Catholic country - even among anglophones.

-----

Canada has regional divides, but it also has linguistic and religious divides. Many people in the West are plain Lutheran protestant. Ostentatious Catholics are different.

We get along. God knows how.

Probably because whether they are "protestant" or "catholic", most Canadians are actually agnostics and atheists.

[carepov]

Neither am I. I am an atheist, as are many other posters on this board, in fact. Perhaps the majority, actually. In my opinion, the kind of Christians you describe are preferable to the zealous ones; they are making progress, slowly freeing themselves of the shackles of religion. The less people identify as religious, and the less religious are the people that identify as religious, the closer we come to a rational world. It is a process that should be allowed to happen gradually and naturally, as more and more people realize that religion has less and less to offer them.

First of all, there is no debate regarding over-religious societies (fanatics/zealots etc...) - in these cases absolutely: the less religion the more rational. Overall the most rational societies are less religious.

However, once the influence of religion reaches a certain low point (similar to what we have in the West), I would argue that it is no longer true that: "The less people identify as religious, and the less religious are the people that identify as religious, the closer we come to a rational world."

Today, look at the least religious countries:

http://www.therichest.com/expensive-lifestyle/location/top-10-countries-with-the-least-religious-people/

#1 is China. It is of course becoming more rational, however it has nothing to do with religion - China was not religious during the Cultural Revolution however it was certainly not rational.

#2 is Japan. How can the level of sexism in Japanese society be explained? IMO, it shows a huge lack of reason.

IMO, today and throughout history, the most irrational acts (mass violations of human rights) have nothing to do with religion.

And of course in today's West, there are no: "shackles of religion".

[bleeding heart]

Surely it irks you for someone to insist that they're something and then act nothing that something which they claim to be? e.g., "I'm an avid reader of novels. However, I only read Harry Potter books."

Well, this is the same argument that liberal religionists tend to use against their conservative (or perhaps I mean "literalist") counterparts.

I'd prefer they not call themselves Christian, rather than them speak like Christians with more legitimate claims to the label. I say that just in case you thought I'd prefer them start acting like those with legitimate claims to the word Christian.

But all we've got here is two self-described Christians who don't see their religion the same way.

Why do you consider one type (ie the type you don't particularly like) as "legitimate"? Who's to say?

Edited November 11, 2013 by bleeding heart

[August1991]

Probably because whether they are "protestant" or "catholic", most Canadians are actually agnostics and atheists.

Nowadays, perhaps. But once upon a time, religion was the great divide in Canada.

Canada is still marked by this Christian religious divide. As in the US, Catholics (or their progeny) vote Left and Protestants (etc) vote Right.

You'll note that Le Devoir (Catholic, I paraphrase) once defended the race. Then it defended the faith. Then the language. And now, I think, it defends the equality of women and men - or "Quebec values".

[August1991]

However, once the influence of religion reaches a certain low point (similar to what we have in the West), I would argue that it is no longer true that: "The less people identify as religious, and the less religious are the people that identify as religious, the closer we come to a rational world."

I disagree. In Newfoundland, a society with a religious mix (like Canada), it was a common tradition for a Catholic cabinet Minister to have a Protestant deputy Minister, and vice versa. (BTW, Rick Mercer, a Newfoundlander and a Leftist, is Catholic.)

Lebanon, another mixed religion society, also had a similar tradition. Years ago, the President was Christian, the PM was Sunnite and the Speaker of the House was Shi'ite.

I generally object to traditions but as Woody Allen would say, "Whatever works."

Edited November 13, 2013 by August1991