Tuesday, July 15

Crackers again...

Reading Myers' blog again, to see if there were any updates. He's had to close at least two posts for commenting because there was too much! And these are thousands of comments!

I think the reason it really bothered me is ithat it was unfounded on the truth. Of course, truth is always a relative term... Myers took it out of context and yes, people wanting to kill a kid for taking the communion wafer are over the line. Yes, those are irrational Catholics. But that doesn't mean that Catholics are irrational, and I suppose that assumption would lead to the second assumption I noted earlier this week, that Myers behaves as though, because he has science on his side, he is reasonable and right and just. However, it doesn't work like that. Life is not a logic equation.

I read a book called Do you think what you think you think?. The whole premise is just to see if your idea of God is logical. It's not trying to reform you or anything, there's no religion-bashing, it's just to get you to think about it. It also has some good tips on logic, and at one point they show that in electoral campaigns, politicians say something like, "Vote for me if you want a better country", which, in our strange human decoding, translates into, "if I don't vote for him it means I don't want a better country". Pretty useful for influencing the masses, but annoying to anyone else who stops to think. Smiling waving politician at the podium isn't saying "if and only if you vote for me do you want a better country", which means that you can want a better country and vote for someone who will do that for you.

Then there are those who are so disgusted with what they see as a phoney suit trying to honey up some votes, and completely disregard everything. That would be the scientist, anti-religion Myers. Just reading some of the comments on this thread, the short-sightedness of some similar types is evidenced (note that short-sightedness goes with a lack of ability to put into context, a general apathy, or a strong desire to be 'insulted' and scientifically (or technically) prove their rightness)

Sometimes I saw replies to comments that quoted part or all of a sentence and proceeded to prove how they are right or the original commenter is wrong - note that one does not necessecarily invoke the other. However, if they stopped being so excited about finding someone wrong, they'd find that the person they are ridiculing has the same point as them. Impatience... sigh. (And yes, I am impatient too.)

To Myers: yes, it is only a cracker. Many people know that, and many Catholic people know that, at a certain point, yes, it is just a piece of bread. Part of religion is belief and importance of values. I wouldn't harken it to make-believe, because it is a couple levels above that. It's like a way to live your life, to find peace, to guide your choices. And if I'm not mistaken, I'm Catholic and I'm not ramming it down anyone's throat. Nevertheless, the Eucharist has a certain importance in the lives of those who follow God in this way, and it does have importance as that role. It's not like you can ignore stock market speculation and buy stocks at cheaper than they are listed - just the fact that it is thought to have importance give it importance - and that's a real thing, influencing the real world.

As far as awakening Catholics to the fact that it is only just a cracker, I think Myers may have just wanted to kind of look like that was what he was trying to do so he'd have some recourse - that with reason on his side he would save the poor backwards peasants.

No comments: