"Nothing is more dreaded than the national government meddling with religion." John Adams

Featured Posts


Creative Minority Reader

A Juvenile Perception of God

Madalyn Murray O'Hair has caused untold damage to our culture, I believe, by her push to get prayer removed from schools. Let's face it, she was quite successful on that front. But a recent piece just shocked me on how juvenile her thinking about God was. And it made me kind of sad.

Jeremy Lott writes:

One night, the late Madalyn Murray O'Hair received absolute proof of the truth of atheism.

According to Brian Le Beau's great biography The Atheist, "in early 1946 during a violent electrical storm...Madalyn, still pregnant [with a married man's baby] and in despair, announced that she was going out into the storm to challenge God to strike her and her unborn child dead with lightning bolts."

For some time, O'Hair "stood in the rain waving her fist and cursing God."

Her arm failed to act as a lightning rod that day, so she went back indoors.

"You see?" she cried "If God exists he would surely have taken up my challenge."
You've heard of similar stories, I'm sure. People challenge God and when that challenge is seemingly unmet they cite this as PROOF that God doesn't exist when all they really did was prove that they themselves are not more powerful than God.

If a child walked up to his father and yelled at him and cursed him and dared the father to hit him, would that prove that the father didn’t exist?

Hers was a teenage temper tantrum that proved only that God doesn’t throw teenage temper tantrums.

I know that when I was younger and unsure of...well...anything, I too challenged God. I made demands. And if I'm being honest with myself I probably still make demands of God. But when I don't receive the answer I demand, I don't question God's existence, I question my pride which led me to believe that God was accountable to me.




*subhead*Atheist.*subhead*

Your Ad Here

20 comments:

Patrick Archbold said...

God in His infinite mercy, did not listen to her despair, but allowed her to rage because she was so very very afraid.

Patrick Archbold said...

The criticizing of the Pope is a sin, as it is a sin to criticize all of our clergy. Yes we have bad clergy and yes some of the things they do or say make us pull our hair out. But what we are supposed to do is PRAY for them and let Jesus fix the problems. They are His to begin with. He called them to this position. Just as He has fixed all of the other of problems in the Church over the last 2000 years, He will correct those clergy who are not towing the line and we will pray for them, as we are told to do. They have more to lose than we do. They are the caretaker of our souls and Christ is the caretaker of theirs.

Patrick Archbold said...

Poor Mrs. O'Haire (I am unsure of the spelling) was a lost child of God, as are we all. Instead of helping her out of her slough, the American people through their passivity magnified not her soul but her distress. She, poor thing, was never the enemy - we are our own enemy when we don't vote and so through our own passivity empower enormities.

Patrick Archbold said...

Anyone who thoroughly understands and practices the Catholic faith should be able to immediately recognize error and/or heresy, regardless of the source. To remain silent in the face of such public abominations constitutes a mortal sin of omission. Case closed.

Patrick Archbold said...

And if she had been struck down dead by lightening, people would have said it was a coincidence.

Patrick Archbold said...

OK Here is the problem. When I used the word "agenda" it was to refer to my perception that you are proposing that all criticism falls under the prohibition of "judgement," and that all judgement is forbidden when, scripturally, it is clearly not. Please define what you mean by "judging." The topic under discussion in this post, is criticism. You responded with scriptures about judgement. If you mean one should not condemn others to perdition, then I am in agreement. But again, the discussion was about criticism not condemnation

Patrick Archbold said...

Bingo.


For instance, one can criticize the action of JPII in kissing a Koran all while not passing judgment on him either as a person or even his tenure as the Vicar of Christ.


It's often said by those who criticize so-called traditionalists that their (traditionalist) criticisms of the actions of the Pope (or Bishop, etc) indicate a lack of faith or fear on their part. And that is perhaps true. But believe the same thing can be said for the hysterical lot who meet every criticism of the Pope with knee-jerk, tribal retorts of "pharisee", "reactionary", "rad-trad", "poison", etc. But they do "get Francis". Just ask them.

Patrick Archbold said...

Guilty of this myself. Thankfully, I had the good wits to know that God doesn't operate in this manner.

Patrick Archbold said...

Yes I believe God fixes the Church, through people - how else would we ever have found out about the sex scandles or anything else that has ever happened? The Church is protected by the Holy Spirit and God will deal with the men He put in the Church to feed His Sheep Himself. All we need to do is pray about it. I have participated in criticizing clergy, myself, but I read something one day that made me rethink that what I had been doing was wrong. It's just like gossip and probably worse than gossip about our neighbors - it's gossip about God's chosen men to lead HIS Church. Prayer is what we need to do and the Pope has discussed the harm of gossip.

Patrick Archbold said...

What's missing here is whether people REALLY understand Francis? Do you EVER think YOU don't really understand what he is saying. Not because he is not clear but we are dense and think only a certain way. He said he is the Son of the Church. The apostles had a very hard time understanding Jesus,as certainly did ST. Paul. Check yourselves for awhile first. Are you smarter than them or the Holy Father. I very much doubt it.

Patrick Archbold said...

The woman lived on the edge. Unfortunately, she and her son Jon were murdered by an associate for her money and fled. From my understanding, not many mourned her in death.

Patrick Archbold said...

So Alex, do you "get" Francis?

Patrick Archbold said...

We have a duty to use our intellect and will as knowledgeable Catholics, to protect the deposit of Faith and morals, and mitigate scandal caused by those in authority. Popes can err in grave matters outside of magisterial statements. We do not jettison our critical faculties when it comes to things said or done by a pope that conflict with the unchangeable doctrine of the Faith and morals. Catholicism is reasonable. It is understandable. Fides et ratio.

Patrick Archbold said...

The deposit of Faith is protected by the Holy Spirit. All men have free will and may choose evil, even at very high levels in the Church. It is ignoring the same that has allowed it to become much worse. Our obedience is to the deposit of Faith and morals, and to the Pope insofar as what he says or does does not conflict with the deposit of Faith and morals. The Faith has objective content which can never change.

Patrick Archbold said...

The atheist is tolerated. Atheism is unconstitutional.

Patrick Archbold said...

All of the above is irrelevant to the point in issue. Do not turn off your intellect. So few people can reason anymore - our state-controlled ducational systems churn out robots. Bring back Catholic education system! We have a duty to object to grave scandal endangering souls, especially when coming from the Pope, who can do the most damage if he does or says anything that conflicts with the unchangeable Faith and objective truth in morals. Please read Robert de Mattei's letter to Fr Fanzaga of Radio Maria explaining this clearly and simply. I cry for the ignorance of Catholics of their Faith and the natural law - they have been failed for 50 years by a majority of bishops, priests and teachers. The primary obedience is to God through His Revelation of Tradition, Scripture and Magisterium. One does not obey a prelate if such "obedience" means disobeying the deposit of Faith and morals.

Patrick Archbold said...

Do not judge another's soul or his ultimate destination. If one were not to judge per se, that would mean not using our God-given faculties of reason and discernment. Wake up.

Patrick Archbold said...

No. They probably would have condemned God for being inhumane or some such thing. They never miss a good scourging.

Patrick Archbold said...

St. Thomas Aquinas said: "It must be observed, however, that if the faith were endangered, a subject ought to rebuke his prelate even publicly. Hence Paul, who was Peter's subject, rebuked him in public, on account of the imminent danger of scandal concerning faith, and, as the gloss of Augustine says on Gal. 2:11: 'Peter gave an example to superiors, that if at any time they should happen to stray from the straight path, they should not disdain to be reproved by their subjects'."


Pope Francis is clearly causing scandal among the faithful.

Patrick Archbold said...

That is what I thought too. She came to the wrong conclusion about God. She had a tantrum as do some children. The loving parent doesn't punish but is patient and understanding. Allows the child to mature and grow in understanding.

Post a Comment