Skip to main content

Facing the Holy Double Standard

By Carl S ~

Have you thought about the incompatibility between what clerics and other Christian-morality figureheads preach and their private behavior? Since access to information of clergy immorality is available as never before, we see by what's exposed good reasons to doubt they actually believe what they’re preaching. How can pedophile clergy continue to rape children, cheat on their spouses, and lie outright as if truth has no meaning, meanwhile trusting they will get away with such behaviors? Do they really believe that an all-seeing deity-judge is watching them? How could they dare?

Christians may give us explanations in order to forgive and rationalize clerical perpetrators, as they did immediately following the first revelations of pedophilic clerical acts. They'd look at me, as one young man did, say "Carl, you just have to understand..." (Such believers, I've found, aren't interested in my points, but are preaching to me. And why do I "have" to understand?) I'm going to turn the mirror around so they can see what they're saying. I'm going to point out on this page there is the reality of a holy double standard pertaining to the priests, imams, rabbis, "reverends," exclusively, with a different set for their followers. Societies won't challenge this. (For quick evidence of this: anyone can find overt examples by reading about cult leaders and their adherents. Loyalty to religion is as strong as the loyalty still given to Warren Jeffs.

To understand how the systems supporting immoral behavior works, we need to look at the bigger picture. Loyalty to the religious institutions carries with it the assurance: "We protect our own." Cover-ups are part of the unwritten contract. Their ministers belong to Never Reveal Organization Forgiving. Don't assume otherwise; it has ever been so, from the beginning, right back to ancient Egypt, Greece, and Rome. "God" is a cover. Religion isn't so much like politics but politics itself.

In order to keep the faith, believers are willing to look the other way.The holy double standard doesn't mean so much "Do as I say, not as I do; " rather it is an assumption the claimants are entitled to respect even when they cross the boundaries of the morality others must follow; just because they speak for and are authorities of God. If you think about it, this makes perfect theological sense: just as God is exempt from accountability and explanations to his children, so too are his anointed leaders. (Remember: The first response to accusations of pedophilic priest cover-ups in Boston was, “Separation of church and state")

In order to keep the faith, believers are willing to look the other way. The churches count on their unwillingness, unless confronted with the unavoidable public shame brought about through public revelations. This is power itself. Even after so many years of these, there are still faithful Catholics. Morality is not the priority; being faithful to the tribe is valued more than personal conscience. Clergy know that as long as they are loyally playing the game by the internal rules set up for them, such as spouting the party line, they're safe. They don't need to believe the doctrines they preach; they have only to convince others to believe. Let's be honest. This is their job. It's what they're paid to do. We're dealing with practicality after all.

Religions feel neither shame no remorse for their immoral actions; these they reserve for their individual members to live with, and personally repent for. Every one of them. "Men of God" owe loyalty to their superiors and to one another, and not to moral codes. It's the system not mentioned. To quote from Catholic ritual: "As it was in the beginning, is now, and ever shall be, world without end, amen." No God needed, watching, intervening, caring, or otherwise involved. Ask the victims.


Popular posts from this blog

Are You an Atheist Success Story?

By Avangelism Project ~ F acts don’t spread. Stories do. It’s how (good) marketing works, it’s how elections (unfortunately) are won and lost, and it’s how (all) religion spreads. Proselytization isn’t accomplished with better arguments. It’s accomplished with better stories and it’s time we atheists catch up. It’s not like atheists don’t love a good story. Head over to the atheist reddit and take a look if you don’t believe me. We’re all over stories painting religion in a bad light. Nothing wrong with that, but we ignore the value of a story or a testimonial when we’re dealing with Christians. We can’t be so proud to argue the semantics of whether atheism is a belief or deconversion is actually proselytization. When we become more interested in defining our terms than in affecting people, we’ve relegated ourselves to irrelevance preferring to be smug in our minority, but semantically correct, nonbelief. Results Determine Reality The thing is when we opt to bury our

Christian TV presenter reads out Star Wars plot as story of salvation

An email prankster tricked the host of a Christian TV show into reading out the plots of The Fresh Prince of Bel Air and Star Wars in the belief they were stories of personal salvation. The unsuspecting host read out most of the opening rap to The Fresh Prince, a 1990s US sitcom starring Will Smith , apparently unaware that it was not a genuine testimony of faith. The prankster had slightly adapted the lyrics but the references to a misspent youth playing basketball in West Philadelphia would have been instantly familiar to most viewers. The lines read out by the DJ included: "One day a couple of guys who were up to no good starting making trouble in my living area. I ended up getting into a fight, which terrified my mother." The presenter on Genesis TV , a British Christian channel, eventually realised that he was being pranked and cut the story short – only to move on to another spoof email based on the plot of the Star Wars films. It began: &quo

So Just How Dumb Were Jesus’ Disciples? The Resurrection, Part VII.

By Robert Conner ~ T he first mention of Jesus’ resurrection comes from a letter written by Paul of Tarsus. Paul appears to have had no interest whatsoever in the “historical” Jesus: “even though we have known Christ according to the flesh, we know him so no longer.” ( 2 Corinthians 5:16 ) Paul’s surviving letters never once mention any of Jesus’ many exorcisms and healings, the raising of Lazarus, or Jesus’ virgin birth, and barely allude to Jesus’ teaching. For Paul, Jesus only gets interesting after he’s dead, but even here Paul’s attention to detail is sketchy at best. For instance, Paul says Jesus “was raised on the third day according to the Scriptures” ( 1 Corinthians 15:4 ), but there are no scriptures that foretell the Jewish Messiah would at long last appear only to die at the hands of Gentiles, much less that the Messiah would then be raised from the dead after three days. After his miraculous conversion on the road to Damascus—an event Paul never mentions in his lette

Morality is not a Good Argument for Christianity

By austinrohm ~ I wrote this article as I was deconverting in my own head: I never talked with anyone about it, but it was a letter I wrote as if I was writing to all the Christians in my life who constantly brought up how morality was the best argument for Christianity. No Christian has read this so far, but it is written from the point of view of a frustrated closeted atheist whose only outlet was organizing his thoughts on the keyboard. A common phrase used with non-Christians is: “Well without God, there isn’t a foundation of morality. If God is not real, then you could go around killing and raping.” There are a few things which must be addressed. 1. Show me objective morality. Define it and show me an example. Different Christians have different moral standards depending on how they interpret the Bible. Often times, they will just find what they believe, then go back into scripture and find a way to validate it. Conversely, many feel a particular action is not


By David Andrew Dugle ~   S ettle down now children, here's the story from the Book of David called The Parable of the Bent Cross. In the land Southeast of Eden –  Eden, Minnesota that is – between two rivers called the Big Miami and the Little Miami, in the name of Saint Gertrude there was once built a church. Here next to it was also built a fine parochial school. The congregation thrived and after a multitude of years, a new, bigger church was erected, well made with clean straight lines and a high steeple topped with a tall, thin cross of gold. The faithful felt proud, but now very low was their money. Their Sunday offerings and school fees did not suffice. Anon, they decided to raise money in an unclean way. One fine summer day the faithful erected tents in the chariot lot between the two buildings. In the tents they set up all manner of games – ring toss, bingo, little mechanical racing horses and roulette wheels – then all who lived in the land between the two rivers we

I can fix ignorance; I can't fix stupid!

By Bob O ~ I 'm an atheist and a 52-year veteran of public education. I need not tell anyone the problems associated with having to "duck" the "Which church do you belong to?" with my students and their parents. Once told by a parent that they would rather have a queer for their sons' teacher than an atheist! Spent HOURS going to the restroom right when prayers were performed: before assemblies, sports banquets, "Christmas Programs", awards assemblies, etc... Told everyone that I had a bladder problem. And "yes" it was a copout to many of you, but the old adage (yes, it's religious) accept what you can't change, change that which you can and accept the strength to know the difference! No need arguing that which you will never change. Enough of that. What I'd like to impart is my simple family chemistry. My wife is a Baptist - raised in a Baptist Orphanage (whole stories there) and is a believer. She did not know my religi