• Nougat@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    11 months ago

    Whether someone is a “vegan” depends on behavior in ways that “Christian” doesn’t. Even so, being “vegan” - even when the person does not directly and knowingly consume animal products - completely ignores the fact that they are indirectly making use of animal products, because they depend on a society that currently uses animal products, and where that society got to the technological level it’s at through the use of animal products over many millenia.

    And we’re back to No True Scotsman, adjusting the definition to fit the circumstances.

    • Zoolander@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      11 months ago

      No it doesn’t. Being vegan doesn’t mean that you believe you’re not using or consuming animal products. It means you don’t consume animal products. Period. It’s why the Vegan Police came after Todd. The only person adjusting the definition to fit the circumstances is you. If a central tenet of being a vegan is that the very first vegan ever said that anyone who eats or uses an animal product can’t be vegan, then that person isn’t vegan whether they intended that or not. The Catholic Church is founded on the idea that the Pope is the mouthpiece of god. To say that any Pope chosen in the lineage of that church is “not the real pope” is blasphemy and, by definition, not Catholic.

      • Nougat@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        11 months ago

        The Catholic Church is founded on the idea that the Pope is the mouthpiece of god.

        Who decides who the “right” Pope is? You must certainly know that issues of succession (oh so topically) are often contested, and the Catholic Church is not immune to that.

        • Zoolander@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          11 months ago

          God does. That’s the point. The Catholic belief, which is written into the very doctrine and dogma of the religion, is that God is guiding the process and that God chooses the Pope. The whole religion is based on the idea that Jesus took the wheel and handed it to Peter afterwards who then handed it to the next person. Papal infallibility, as a concept, is the promise that the leadership of the Catholic Church is free from human error so, yes, according to their own beliefs, they are explicitly immune from that.

          • Nougat@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            11 months ago

            God does.

            And that’s why this is entirely a circular and nonsensical thing.

            • Zoolander@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              2
              ·
              11 months ago

              Of course it is. But you’re the one arguing against your definition of these terms, not their own. From a standpoint of furthering discussion, I’m an atheist. I don’t believe any of this. But I know what the religion dictates as the definition of who they are and, based on that, you’re wrong about how they view themselves and how they’ve defined themselves.

              • Nougat@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                11 months ago

                Again, history is written by the victors. It “just so happens” that the Pope is the Pope because the portion of the Catholic Church which says he’s the Pope has the social, economic, and political power to make that “true.” Which would be the case no matter which portion achieved that set of powers; we could just as easily be referring to a whole different set of Popes, past and present.

                I’m not talking about how they view or define themselves. If Catholic dogma wants to say that that’s what God intended, that’s fine. Neither of us has to believe it. If some other set of Popes ended up existing, that would have been “what God intended.”

                • Zoolander@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  11 months ago

                  What does this have to do with history? You’re not making any sense whatsoever. We’re not discussing who has social, economic, or political power. We’re talking about the fact that, since its inception, the doctrines of Catholicism define the religion as being led by the Pope, a person who is chosen by God to be his mouthpiece. By their own standard, it is impossible for there to be a “wrong” Pope because God is the one choosing who that person is. Because of this, anyone who claims that the wrong Pope was chosen is themselves wrong because God cannot be wrong and the Pope, by extension of God, cannot be wrong and is infallible.

                  You might not be talking about how they view or define themselves but that’s literally what this entire conversation and thread have been about. Just because you misunderstood that and interjected yourself doesn’t mean everyone else is wrong. You are.

                  • Nougat@kbin.social
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    11 months ago

                    You’re talking about “the Catholic Church and its deity is the very end of any discussion about who is the rightful Pope,” and I’m talking about “But it has happened that multiple people, each with their own supporters, claimed to be the rightful Pope at the same time.”

                    When that happens, which one of those is “the Catholic Church”? In the moment, there is no way to tell. Looking back across history, we can see the outcome.

                    I’m really not sure why this is hard for you to comprehend, or why you’re entirely hung up on Catholic dogma.