Dangerous Catholic Doctrines

Here are some examples of things that the Church should not get away with.

As God is said to be all-good, the Church denies that he made evil. So it says evil is merely good that is in the wrong place. If this doctrine is wrong, then the Church is enabling evil. It is not seeing the evil power in the sinner. It is blinding itself to that. It sees something it calls evil but does not see it for what it is.

To call abortion even in the early stages murder, as the Church does, is to call doctors and the mother murderers and is hate speech. If calling them scum is hate speech then calling them murderers is worse. If you really believe it is murder you could end up going berserk and killing a woman for having had an abortion or working as an abortionist. The Church might disapprove but it should call it manslaughter not murder. We need to ask if it is time to legally penalise those who demonise abortion. 

The Church accuses children of original sin, an estrangement from God carried from conception that needs to be forgiven in baptism. This is abusing the child by slander. Too many forget that the weakness we are born with is not believed to be original sin but a result! This mistake blinds some to what baptism is really about, slandering the child on religious grounds and then lifting that slander.

The Church forbids idolatry - it wants prayer done its way. People have little fetishes and superstitions. Some people like to pray to a dead grandparent as if to a god. Others like to pray to a statue. Others may pray to the deceased family pet. You can get comfort by praying to anything. You don't need faith in God. The Church does not care about what works for you. It ignores the fact that the one religion cannot be right for everybody for people are so different and have different quirks and needs. It is just bigoted and controlling.

Nobody trusts God completely. A child can't trust God very well for he or she knows little about him and he seems invisible and aloof. Yet children are praying for bicycles. They know some children get the bicycles and others don't. They don't trust God to be good though they may trust him to help them get the bicycle. They are encouraged to pray. Are they not then being led to, "Dear God, give me the bicycle and let somebody else do without?" If they don't say that they will say it and intend it in their hearts!

Children can be traumatised by prayer when they see it is not answered. They will think, "What is wrong with me that God wouldn't help me?"

The Church causes suspicion against those who are not baptised. Baptism is supposed to make you clean and fit for Heaven and heals the tendency to evil in you meaning that an unbaptised person is not as trustworthy as a baptised one. The Church may say a baptised person can do greater evil than an unbaptised. That solves nothing. The point is that the Church says unbaptised people have more of an excuse for being evil and untrustworthy than the baptised. They are saying the baptised sin in spite of their power not to while it can only be expected that the unbaptised sin. The doctrine of the power of baptism implies that with religions without valid baptism, the proper approach is to judge them with cynicism. It is best to assume then that they invent their God and he is a mental idol even if he resembles the real God. It is possible to be attached to the concepts of God and not to God. This is idolatry and is far worse than the obvious idolatry of praying to images. It is worse for it is insidious and subtle.

The Church urges parents to have babies baptised with a view to bringing them up to agree with the Church. The Church is conditioning those children. If the faith was really true and really credible or persuasive, it would not need to use such underhand tactics. Children do not need to be raised as Catholics. Lots of good children are not.

Many modern religions don't have this manipulative approach at all. Wicca for example refuses to accept new converts easily. It demands of them a lot of thinking and soul-searching and research before it will accept them. It wants them to be sure. It believes that if they really want to join the religion they will persevere.

The Church agrees with the racism of the Old Testament that the Jews were the chosen race of God.

The Church tells children that the bread of communion is the literal body of Jesus. They will see this as eating real flesh with God making it look and taste like bread and tricking their senses. This can be and should be disturbing for a child. Doctrines like that can lead the child to a dangerous and disturbing belief in magic. Religious children have been known to jump out of speeding cars and plunge into dangerous rivers over it.

The teaching that Jesus is fully in all the wafer makes it fully plain that children can believe that Jesus' penis is in their mouths when they receive communion. The Eucharist can be described as being Jesus' penis. The Eucharist certainly implies there is no problem with child sex abuse. This is religious style sex abuse.

The Church forces children to confess "serious" sins in confession under pain of going to Hell forever. This is intimidation and a desecration of the child that must be condemned in the strongest possible terms.

Children can be traumatised at the thought of Jesus being able to watch them in the bath. Little girls feel Jesus can see up their skirts. Indeed they should be traumatised. The only solution is to keep Christian influences away from them. The time I believed in spiritualism, it disturbed me to think that the spirits were there watching my intimate moments.

The Church traumatises the relatives of suicides by saying that eternal Hell is possible for all of us.

Religion has sins that have some overlaps with human decency but they add in a whole lot more sins which puts a burden of guilt and self-criticism on the religious person. The sins include suspecting that Mary was not sinless, the pope is not infallible and so many others. Not going to Mass on Sunday is a sin. Jesus said that the biggest and most important commandment was to love God with all your heart and soul and mind. God wrote the Bible so you should rather read his book than any other. Loving yourself and your neighbour was only secondary in importance. So if you would not jump into a tank of boiling oil and be crucified as a martyr of God then you break the greatest commandment and thus commit the greatest sin. This is a huge burden. People will fail and give up.

The doctrine that we can go to Hell at death forever and if we do there is no hope for us plainly suggests that you have no right to the proof of this doctrine. They say that for it cannot be proven. Yet people say you can commit a sin that deserves it! They are accusing you without proof! You need absolute proof before you can suggest people can commit a sin so bad as to go to Hell.

The morality of the Church is so ludicrous that the Church tends to fail to practice it consistently. A child talking to her doll and asking it for help is idolatry for the pagans just thought of gods as superhuman entities or entities that were just like ourselves but could do different things. Private detectives have to tell lies to do their job and can be good Catholics though the Church forbids all lies. If you commit a sin that deserves Hell you would be mad if you thought such a hypocritical religion that would approve if you went there cares much about you!

Religion should not be asking people to do other than what they would do if they were good unbelievers.

Children are told that Jesus died for their sins for nobody else could save them meaning that the child must feel responsibility for crucifying Jesus.

The Church traumatises people dying in car accidents who panic because they know they will not have a priest to anoint them and absolve them.

The Church traumatises mothers and fathers who lose a baby to a painful illness by saying that God takes ultimate responsibly for this for he rules all creation and must have a reason for letting this happen. This adds the trauma of wondering why it happened and struggling against anger with God to the shock and despair.

The Church says that if a couple having a baby would be a health disaster, that the couple should trust in God and use natural family planning which lets him send a baby if he wishes. The law might say that if disaster ensues that the couple must take responsibility for listening to the Church and though the Church teaching is nonsense it is not the Church's fault that it went wrong. Where do you draw the line with an excuse like that. If a doctor gives you a pill and tells you to trust him and the pill gives you brain damage no court would expect you to excuse him by saying you decided to take the pill and he didn't shove it down your throat. The doctor did not threaten you to take the pill. But the Jesus of Catholicism threatens you with punishment in this life and the next if you ignore the family planning rules of the Church.

It is interesting how the Church would argue in court that the couple were to blame for the disaster for nobody forced them to obey her and yet she says that pharmacists should leave their jobs rather than give a girl the morning after pill. It does not say that giving her the pill is putting it into her hands and out of the pharmacist's. It does not say that she and not the pharmacist is responsible for taking it or not.

The Bible is not edifying reading for ordinary people and children. It is full of gore and presents the world with a God who wants people butchered for not respecting him. Children can be disturbed by it and it does make a child feel that violence is fine and those who criticise violence are the bad ones. It did that with me as a child.

A revelation from God passed down from the Church can't have the same authority as a revelation from God to you. So if you hear God talking to you and you should obey revelation, then you should do whatever the voice says. If it tells you to kill your neighbour you must do it because God has authority over life and death. He has the right to take life and delegate that right.

The Church should be able to provide evidence that the healing power of its sacraments work. It can't. It is being paid for quackery. The Church is being paid to tell the truth and it isn't doing it. It is telling lies, half-truths and defaming people and so on. It is treating guesses and assumptions as truths when they should be treated as what they are just guesses and assumptions. To say my religion has spiritual power to heal the soul of evil and another does not is defamation. It is accusing other religions of being bad even if they are not deliberately bad. Either way they are just as much being called dangerous. It should be considered defamation until the Church provides sound research to back up its claims. What happened to innocent until proven guilty you may say? But that is what defamation is, saying things without very very strong and persuasive proof about people that cast them in a bad or dangerous light.

The sick and dying are dragged to miracle sites and nothing happens. They may not even get any spiritual or emotional healing.

The Bible forbids us to heed the warnings on climate change and global warming for it says God promised that as long as the earth exists, seedtime and harvest, cold and heat, winter and summer and day and night will never cease in Genesis 8:22. And 2 Peter 3:10 says that the day of the Lord will come where all is destroyed meaning that God will destroy all not global warming. If so there is no need to worry as the future is God's concern not ours. It is only small evangelical Christian groups who care about the problem.

Catholicism claims to be infallible in teaching faith and morals. This is really fabricating a God out of human ideas about morality. It is making a god out of human philosophy - it is men inventing a God and getting you to bow down before it. For example, people disagree on whether or not sex outside marriage is okay. The Church says that killing a prisoner to take his organs to save the lives of a number of decent people in urgent need of transplants is wrong. A Utilitarian who thinks the greatest happiness of the greatest number would disagree. The Church excommunicates you under canon law for saying the Virgin Mary was conceived in sin but there is no excommunication for murder. Despite the evidently human origin of Catholic morality, they make a God of it and make it the word of God when it is not which is the utmost in blasphemy and idolatry.

Double-effect is a core principle in Catholic morality. The principle of double effect says that when there is a good effect, the bad effect must not be a way to bring it about. So if you give a patient who is dying, pain killers that will speed up her death you will claim that you are not using death to cure her. You are doing a good thing by dealing with her pain and the faster death is just an unwanted and unintended side-effect. But you are ignoring the fact that you are bringing her death about!

The Church lies that the Bible and Church teaching are true knowing fine well that they are not and they are not infallible. Yet they exalt the man-made laws of the pope though they hurt people. It is only too well known that a religion, once well established, being obviously deceitful and false won't do it much harm. Take the Mormon Church surviving the fact that its scripture the Book of Abraham was not a translation from Egyptian papyri but a fraud though it is supposed to be the word of God. Take the Jehovah's Witnesses saying Armageddon will happen before the 1914 generation will die out. Take the Roman Catholic Church surviving the fact that it says miracles show the Church is true when the Church pays no attention to miracles that contradict the teaching of the Church - is that biased or what!

Bible preaches a lot about consciously and actively fulfilled prophecy. It says Jesus deliberately set out to fulfil Bible prophecy. But what about Armageddon?  This is the final battle on earth that destroys the planet while the saints are helped to escape the world by Jesus.  Clearly we are to work to make it happen.  Some Catholics and certainly many Evangelicals think so.  They are logical.  Whoever promotes the faith must take responsibility.

If a social club said and did some of the things the Church says it would be closed down. Even when the Church is silent, it still stands as the representation of its evil. To be a member is to become representative of its evil. Go!