Note to reader: The next two letters were received from "Anonymous", but the writer had the same e-mail address as Mr. Ocoma and signed it "Francis". Ugh. This is nothing more than harassment now.
Letter 17:
Dear Nathan,
As you might have guessed while reading the subject of this e-mail, I have come across your interesting articles: Are You a Real Christian? (Parts 1 and 2). In fact, I was so much impressed by your technique that I am going to write an article called "Are You a Real Atheist?" I am also planning to write similar articles concerning other religions. Thanks for giving me inspiration. :)
These are your list of "What people should do to become Christians" Was the Christian Church able to follow them? You bet your Zeus-led pantheon it did!
- Sell all of your possessions.
In fact, the succesors of the Apostles (the later bishops) and the priests appointed by the bishops do not have any private unncessesary wealth of their own. In fact, most of what they "have" are not actual wealth but are, most of the time, simply donations (in the case of the early Franciscans, alms). Do you know that the Vatican is so poor that it has not paid its water bill for many, many years now?
- Hate your parents, your siblings, your children, and yourself
Your interpration of Jesus' words are erroneous (if not rude). What Jesus simply said is that one must put Christ above any other human being. This does not imply (in any way, in fact) that he should hate any other persons other than Christ. I can love my schoolmate while at the same time loving my sister more than I love my schoolmate. You get what I mean. Besides, Jesus himself has taught love of others (if you even read a single Gospel, you should know this).
- Take off your hat (men) or always wear a hat (women) in church
Ah yes! Another Protestant blunder. I guess you have never heard of the noun "sacramental" before, have you? The act of wearing veils (women) and not wearing hats (men), just like the act of doing the sign of the cross, are sacred and pious acts than are NOT necessarily required by the Church. They are very useful for the increasing of humility, and it is even a sin to judge them negatively, but one may be forgiven for not doing them. This is the same in the case of wearing formal outfits inside the Church, wearing scapulars, rosaries, etc. They are mere sacramentals. So there.
- Keep absolutely silent in church (womenn)
In fact, anyone (man or woman) should not be so noisy in the church, as that would at least be a venial sin (the house of the tabernacle is not a place for vain conversations). I guess Paul simply wanted to scold the majority of the women in his time who cannot keep their habit of chattering noisily (which we Filipinos call "tsis-mis") under control, even in the church. Why do you think "effeminate" is the title given to very chatty men?
- Don't become a minister or priest (womeen)
Feminists who complain about this tend to forget one teensy-weensy rule: - Don't become a nun (men). They even forget another rule: - Don't become a woman (men). And even another rule: - Don't become dogs (humans). See? The function of a man is different from the function of a woman, even if they are equal in dignity (of course, dogs and humans do not have the same dignity, but you get my point). Priesthood is a job for the masculine function. Just as Nunhood (or whatever the noun is) is only for the feminine function. No one in his right mind would call a woman "priest," though, he can call her a "priestess." (Thank God there's no masculine equivalent for "nun!") The thing is, the Catholic Church does not have a Priestesshood. Besides, ordaining a woman as a priest (or priestess, for that matter) is simply a contradiction of the definition of a Catholic priest: one whose body represtents the body of Christ during the Sacraments. How could a feminine body represent a masculine body (Christ)?
- Don't get married unless you absolutelyy have to have it
I must credit you for the most hilarious profanity I have ever seen. Anyways, "absolutely necessary" is not a reference to lust-- Paul condemned lust-- he did not allow anyone to commit lust. "Absolutely necessary" simply refers to God's Divine Plan, since God has a will for everyone of us (though, we are able to disobey His will for us through our own Free Will).
- Don't wear braids, gold, or pearls
In other words: don't succumb to vanity. St. Paul did not condemn vanity in itself-- vanity in itself is not a sin-- he merely warned us of the negative effects of vanity. Vanity is the cause of gluttony, pride, anger, and many other vices. And so, a virtuous person must at least have temperance to prevent vanity from making them sin: and a good way to avoid the negative effects of vanity is to not have vanity at all. Ergo, Paul's suggestion that braids, gold, pearls, etc. must not be worn. He merely scolded those who lived in vice because of vanity.
- Be able to cause fig trees to whither uup
The Catholic Church have been withering unworthy fig trees for almost two thousand years! It's called "ex-communication," Mr. Estle.
- Be able to command mountains into the ssea
I really do not see any need for anyone to command mountains into the sea, simply because mountains (and any other land mass, for that matter) are already journeying towards the sea! It's called tectonics, for your information. It was merely a figure of speach referring to the fact that a man with great faith will never experience the anguish of failure and helplessness, because he knows of the divine success that is above any failure.
- Be able to speak in tongues
If you were able to attend Mass from different parts of the world at the same day, read more than one translation of offical Church documents, and know the Doctors of the Church from different nations, you will realize that the Catholic Church has been speaking in tongues since the Apostles first spoke in tongues some two thousand years ago!
- Be able to handle serpents or drink poiison to no effect
I have been handling a serpent and drinking its poison for months now, and I am still quite intact. The serpent's name is Nathan Estle. Did you ever wonder how the Church survived two thousand years of persecution of serpents, those who vainly attempted to poison the Church to its demise, if the Church did not know how to handle them?
- Heal the sick with ease
There are four Sacraments attesting the the Church's ability to heal: Baptism, Eucharist, Reconciliation, and Anointing of the Sick. Not to mention exorcism. And do you know that many priests are also medical doctors?
You see, there is only one command that Jesus really meant to give to every individual Christian (not just the general Church, like the commands mentioned above). This is the command to love: Love God, first of all, and love everyone else. And this love is not an emotion. Jesus was not an emotional person. And so, a loving God is not the same as an emotional God (much less is He like an emotional, war God). And this is something that, although quite difficult at times, is very doable for every individual.
I hope you may learn how to love, not emotional affection, but Divine Charity. And from that, learn that it was God, who became man and died for men because of love, who gave you the ability to love.
Have a wonderful day and may God enlighten you.
- Francis
If the Christian God was an emotional war God, then he must be a very lousy one. Who could have thought that the God who tried to save a most ungrateful civilization and who surrendered his most valuable military weapon (himself) to his enemies was emotional and war-freakish? If God was emotional at all (which I doubt), then it seems to me that he has such a good self-control over his emotions that I really don't fear his being emotional at all!
Letter 18:
Dear Nathan,
some quich corrections to my last e-mail entitled "Am I a real Christian? You bet!":
In dealing with your citation of Paul's view on marriage, I made a blunder of not reading the verses completely (I merely tried to paraphrase them in my head). In the Biblbe passage, it says: "...But if they cannot control themselves..." I paraphrased it as "...But if it is absolutely necessary..."
Of course, if a person is inclined to lust, instead of living in celibacy (which would be a form of torture), he must marry, or at least try to conquer his temptations. Of course, having a wife to have sex with does not validate one's lustful intentions. But common experience has proven that it is easier to fight temptations of the flesh if you have a wife than if you live by yourself.
But this does NOT mean that all married men tend to lust. Paul was simply warning those inclined to lust that it would be hard for them not to marry. Paul maintains his stand that God has a plan (or gift) for everyone, whether he or she will have the gift of celibacy or the gift of fatherhood (cf I Corinthians 7:7).
Thank you for considering these corrections. I'll try not to make any more blunders next time. :)