Bitcoiners Should Be Catholic

With skepticism and moral relativism more prevalent than ever, it's unsurprising that people are inclined to think one's religion has the same level of importance as a favorite sports team. However, everything in life is ordered toward a highest intrinsic good. It is vital to acknowledge what that good is. The Catholic deposit of faith supports principles Bitcoiners cherish, agreeing on what is truly good.

We believe in objective truth.

A signature is valid, or it's not; a transaction is confirmed or not; a block is accepted or not. These are the fundamental objective truths that form the basis of Bitcoin. These truths are not subjective to personal judgment or the whims of politicians. Grounded in mathematics, Bitcoin takes its form in the objective reality of the universe. Yet, many people today don't believe there are objective truths, or at least, if there are objective truths, they think we can't know what they are. However, it is contradictory to say it is true that there is no truth. Objective truth describes reality, so it is true or false for everyone. Since religion, properly understood, describes reality, its central claims are objective and can be investigated. Any religion worth pursuing puts objective truth in the middle of its dogmas. Catholics believe “Man tends by nature toward the truth.” (CCC 2467) Central to the Christian claim is that God is the truth: “I am the way and the truth and the life” (John 14:6). Bitcoiners are some of the only people in our secular world who understand objective truth.

We believe in solidarity.

A society maintains a proper monetary order when the hardest money becomes the only money (Copernicus-Gresham's Law). Furthermore, Bitcoin is a consensus protocol. The network rules bind every participant together, and we all share in the fruits of the network. Users, miners, and developers depend on each other to maintain the network's health. Similarly, the Church teaches all creation orders toward solidarity: "Interdependence must be transformed into solidarity, based upon the principle that the goods of creation are meant for all." (Sollicitudo rei Socialis 39) Humans are social animals who flourish in a community bound together toward common objectives. Bitcoiners intuitively grasp this fundamental Catholic social teaching.

We believe in subsidiarity.

While the Bitcoin network is a shared resource for the common good, it is not a collectivist enterprise. Not your keys, not your coins, flows from the ethic of subsidiarity: “A community of a higher order should not interfere in the internal life of a community of a lower order, depriving the latter of its functions, but rather should support it in case of need and help to coordinate its activity with the activities of the rest of society, always with a view to the common good.” (Centesimus annus 48) Fiat currencies have perverted this principle by introducing the unnatural institution of the central bank. Bitcoin rightly reorders money management back to the lowest level of society: the family, who can hold their keys to save, earn, spend, and invest their own money with sovereignty. Finally, “the principle of subsidiarity is opposed to all forms of collectivism. It sets limits for state intervention. It aims at harmonizing the relationships between individuals and societies. It tends toward the establishment of true international order.” (CCC 1885) Bitcoiners understand the proper international order Catholics have been discussing for centuries and are working toward making it a reality.

Bitcoiners should discern the Catholic faith to deepen their understanding of these principles that resonate deeply with the ethos of Bitcoin. Catholicism offers more than a belief system. It provides a path to spiritual fulfillment and a community grounded in timeless truths, with teachings that will always be true, like the immutable ledgers we keep on our full nodes. Joining the Catholic Church means embracing a tradition that stands the test of time and offers profound purpose and social cohesion in accordance with the eternal law. Join our journey to seek the truth. 

 This is great! @mbasola 

 Nope. Anyone who believes that the pope is infallible is has a few screws loose, especially with the current pope showing that he's just a mouthpiece of the satanic pedo death cult. 

I like a lot of catholic individuals, but... Catholicism itself is a crapcoin. No thanks.  

 I submit that perhaps you are thinking of an overstated version of papal infallibility that the church doesn't hold. I also believe that Francis is willfully misunderstood. Yes he speaks in a messy way, but liberals interpret everything he says in an overly worldly way hoping to mislead people in their direction and conservatives interpret everything he says in an overly worldly way so they can be seen as more righteous than the Pope.

I am not saying he's tremendous, but neither is he a satanic mouthpiece.

With respect to crap-coins. You realize we are running Christianity-Core over here right? Protestantism are hard forks, and anything beyond o.g. protestant are meme-religions that will go to 0 when the strip mall they took over is bulldozed. 

 He's a WEF product. He certainly is part of cabal or at least in thrall of the satanic pedo death cult. It's not even hidden if you look at his history and who his major influences have been.  

 I will admit I am unaware of any of the above, but neither do you back any of your claims. I am more interested in what he says officially than with whom he associated in the past. Jesus associated with tax collectors and prostitutes without endorsing either profession.

Are there any documents he has produced or actions he has taken that support your thesis? 

 Follow the origin in "liberation theology" and you'll figure out why I am opposed to him and in general modern catholicism.  

 As for actions, anyone that willingly interacts with the WEF is automatically suspect. The WEF is entirely anti human and very antichristian even if they play nice with certain figures like the pope to gain influence. 

It's gross and catholics really should be pushing to get "their church" back, even if that's not likely since the catholic church has been in bed with kings and politicians since the beginning, and it's another reason why I consider it a corruption of the ecclesia that Christians were called to build and live under.  

 If you think Pope Francis is bad, you should look back at some of the popes over the past 1000+ years. Yet the Church still stands and seems to be the only institution capable of repelling corrupt forces. There must be something there!

“Your majesty, we Catholic clergy have done our best to destroy the church for the last 1800 years. We have not succeeded, and neither will you.” - Cardinal Consalvi to Napoleon Bonaparte 

 This is only furthering my argument that the catholic church is NOT a good thing and I really can't be dissuaded otherwise. 

There are quite a lot of things and organizations that have lasted longer than the catholic church. Many of them, at least the human related ones, are certainly evil and it's also not hard to see that the catholic church has been severely compromised by a wife variety of outside influences.  

 To recap the conversation: anyone who believes in papal infallibility is incapable of reason, yet when provided with evidence supporting the guidance of the Church, it is rejected out of hand with baseless claims. Is belief in an infallible Church the issue? Or is it the belief that the Church contradicts your infallible opinions that is the issue? I hope you reflect on whether you accept Christ on his terms or your terms. 

 Lol! My terms? No. Jesus' terms certainly. Jesus never meant to rest authority for the church, his bride, in any one man. So, I reject your idea of an infallible church/pope outright. It's just that simple.  

 “And I tell you, you are Peter, and on this rock I will build my church, and the powers of death shall not prevail against it. I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.” (Matthew 16:18-19) 

 And what does that have to do with the pope? Peter still has the keys. So anyone claiming to have them is straight up lying.  

 I guess the church died with Peter! 😂 

 Obviously not, but my point is that he's not. So, if he has been given the keys, why would anyone else hold them?  

 Because Jesus instituted a physical church which needs a leader…

I can’t tell if you’re trolling or genuinely curious. Joe Heshmeyer has done good work on early Christianity. He wrote the books Pope Peter and The Early Church Was the Catholic.

I think all Christians believe the Holy Spirit guides “the church,” even if they believe “the church” to be an informal community of believers. As the early Christians did, Catholics believe the Church is a physical presence on earth, which is to say, a real community with real leaders. Just like the apostles replaced Judas with Matthias, succession is essential to continue the mission of the Church.

Also, for the sake of clarity, papal infallibility is extremely narrowly defined. It exists because the (head of the) Church can’t officially teach error, which is a pretty obvious dogma if you already accept that the Holy Spirit is guiding it. 

 Because Jesus instituted a physical church which needs a leader…

And yet Peter still lives, or do you not believe that? 

Do you not believe that Jesus is also physical and the head of the church? If Jesus is the head of the church, and he's alive and leading along with the holy spirit, and he's also not "here," then Peter doesn't need to be "here" to be the rock upon which the church is built. 

I'm not trolling. I just can't believe that catholics can't bother to figure out pretty simple stuff like this. 

Judas was replaced because of the betrayal, not because the 12 apostles needed to be succeeded in perpetuity. The Apostles will sit in judgment of the 12 tribes. The Apostles. Not anyone else. That's their role, other than obviously filling the great commission. There has never been any indication in scripture (that I'm aware of) that The Church is in need of a singular human leader. Following the lead from the OT, kings were NOT what God preferred for His chosen nation. I can and do equate the pope to a self proclaimed king (yeah, yeah, he's elected, BFD) which is, IMO, anathema to how God wants His people to be "ruled." 

What you are saying is, IMO, much to materialistic and also does not follow the precedents set by God in the example of Isreal (the people from the Bible, not the current state gubment) and how He wishes them to be. 

I don't really care how narrowly defined papal infallibility is or is not. It's an idiotic concept prima fascia. The whole of the papacy is incorrect. The whole hierarchical structure of the church is incorrect. Much of the doctrine is directly in conflict with scripture (used in a fairly broad sense here), and therefore is, IMO, heretical. 

It might seem like I'm trolling, but I'm not. I place no faith in men. I place less than no faith in those that claim some sort of power over me. I have no king but Christ. Anyone who would Shephard me better be local and strong, and I don't consider the pope to be either.  

 Because there aren't any “Christians” who claim no one has authority over them because they're under the guidance of the Holy Spirit who aren't a “mouthpiece of the satanic pedo death cult”? I can't believe Protestants can't bother to see what has happened to Christianity outside the Church.

It's shocking how weak the arguments are against Catholicism and how intransigent its opponents are. I've yet to see a Biblical reference or evidence to refute my claims, only opinions written authoritatively. I'm all for conversations between different denominations to figure out the truth, but many like this lack essential goodwill. 

 Who said I was a protestant? I heave huge issues with pretty much all protestant denominations as well as issues with orthodoxy. Stop assuming things. 

You can't believe what's happened to Christianity outside the catholic church? Well, I can't believe what's happened to the totality of Christianity in "the west." period. Catholics always act holier than everyone, and don't want to hear any, even minor, criticisms of the claims of the catholic church being the one, true church. That goes against all the descriptions of the church used in the Bible. Christians are part of the body of Christ. Follow that metaphor: each body part is unique, but essential. That should clue you in that there is no one single church that's complete in and of itself. We are all part of the body of Christ, we are all unique, and we don't all need to fall under anyone else's lead but Christ's. 

The pope has no right of authority over me, even since I simply reject his authority, or any pope's authority. The current pope certainly has issues with his philosophical foundations, is directly in bed with anti-humam forces, and is not leading the catholic church in a direction that I think is correct for any person claiming to follow  Christ. Specifically, his socialist bent is disturbing and gross. 

To answer your charge, specifically: protestants are generally a bunch of lame grandstands, at least in the US and Yurp. They are victims of their own success and ego and I can't stand all the idiocy that goes into many of the supposed tenets of their faith. 

Using examples from the Bible about how God dealt with his chosen nation is weak? 🙄

I've already provided several direct concepts from the Bible. That's evidence that I'm guessing you ignored. That's pretty lame of you. 😐

Why should I have any goodwill to modern catholicism? It's not even what once was and has lost most of what made it powerful, though, I am not knowledgeable enough to go after the roots of its power in any depth. 

The arguments are making are "the catholic church is great because the catholic church is great!" That's weak reasoning, and hearing that is actually lame.  

 Protestant: “a member of any of several church denominations denying the universal authority of the Pope and affirming the Reformation principles of justification by faith alone, the priesthood of all believers, and the primacy of the Bible as the only source of revealed truth.”

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/protestant

Protestantism is, by definition, a *protest* against the Catholic faith. I suggest you do a little more research into your faith, and then we can have a more fruitful discussion. 

 I don't affirm the reformation, though, I do agree with those things listed so... 

No, by definition, I am not a strictly a protestant. Just a heretic. 😏😝😂😁😎 

 Also, I have been examining my faith. It has only confirmed my conclusions about catholicism while also looking holes in a bunch of reformation stuff that I had simply took for granted and was not scripturally correct.  

 I appreciate your willingness to examine your faith.

To answer a previous question, the reason why you should always show goodwill towards everyone is to accept them where they are and try to convert them to the truth while keeping your heart open to recognizing the truth as well, wherever it may be (the Church doesn’t claim to be the only place of truth, just the fullness of truth).

Joe Heschmeyer posted a video recently titled The Biblical Case for Infallibility. Since you don’t claim goodwill towards Catholics, and you seem to have a strong resentment for anything a Catholic has to say about the Church, I don’t expect you to be open to his arguments. However, since you seem dedicated to Scripture, which is admirable, I hope you review the Bible passages he references and reflect on what God is trying to tell us.

https://youtu.be/2djx9lESGgA?si=zncj1SehMeYL5sfZ 

 I'm listening to this now. I will comment after.  

 OK. It took me a while to finish it with the attention that I needed to really listen and think about what the presenter was laying out. 

So... 

I agree with nearly everything he said. My one issue is that he insists that the big C Catholic Church is the "one true church." That is so demonstrably false, and my first, largest criticism of the catholic church, that it gets really hard to take much past that seriously for me.

Especially in light of the current pope, who is, as I have stated, part of the satanic pedo cult and has greatly espoused a satanic doctrine based on Marxist BS (which is itself satanic), that even if the Roman Catholic church had not been yet compromised by the election of this pope, is now certainly compromised by lies, so that the truth in unity that the presenter rightly declares as necessary for The Church writ large, is not present (and is my contention that it has not been present since at least Justinian's reign).

So, while agree that protestantism is a mess, the lack of acknowledgement that the current leadership of TRCC is heretical just undermines any other position that one might take in the debate that TRCC is "the one true church" that all Christians should abide in unity within.  

 I appreciate you taking the time to analyze the arguments thoroughly.

Is there a denomination with a better claim to being the one true church than the Catholic Church?

If the answer is no church can claim that, it seems to me that you have a position that contradicts scripture because there is no church we can point to that is being guarded from the gates of hell. Unless you think the community of believers is the church with authority resting in the individual to make declarations on faith and morals, however, that seems contrary to Jesus's prayer for unity since there is no way individuals will all agree. It appears to me there is no escaping recognizing authority for the sake of unity. For this reason, the Catholic Church claims it has the authority to safeguard the deposit of faith (Scripture and Tradition) for Christian unity.

FWIW, even though the pope has authority, that doesn't mean he's above criticism. I am certainly critical of the pope at times. This is an example of criticism from a *cardinal* showing even very sharp public criticism is appropriate: https://newdailycompass.com/en/a-profile-of-the-next-pope-writes-cardinal 

 “This is why the Church is so strict on [abortion] because accepting this is kind of like accepting daily murder.”

“The path to peace calls for respect for life, for every human life, starting with the life of the unborn child in the mother’s womb, which cannot be suppressed or turned into an object of trafficking. In this regard, I deem deplorable the practice of so-called surrogate motherhood, which represents a grave violation of the dignity of the woman and the child, based on the exploitation of situations of the mother’s material needs. A child is always a gift and never the basis of a commercial contract.”

“Gender ideology, today, is one of the most dangerous ideological colonizations. Today children — children — are taught in school that everyone can choose his or her sex. Why are they teaching this? Because the books are provided by the people and institutions that give you money. These forms of ideological colonization are also supported by influential countries. And this is terrible!”

🤔

If we believe the scripture that the gates of hell will not prevail and the Holy Spirit is guiding the Church, the pope speaking infallibly about faith and morals ex-cathedra makes sense. Pray never to lose hope! 

 Are you suggesting membership in the catholic church only requires shared principals and no shared theology? 

 Definitely not! However, principles are a good starting point for exploring theological concepts in depth. 

 Excellent premise, and beautifully argued as well. I wonder about trust, however. One of the main points of the practice of Catholicism is to grow in trust of the Father. It is what Adam failed to do and what Christ did perfectly. "Father in to your hands I commend my spirit."

Faith and trust seem to be intrinsic to the nature of reality. See Kant's critique of reason, Gödel's incompleteness theorem, and Descartes. We can't know without believing something unproven or trusting in someone.

Bitcoiners, however, like to talk about trustless protocols. Many see Bitcoin as trustless money and want to apply similar approaches to other forms of human activity. This is a false notion.

Nothing can operate in a truly trustless fashion. We trust the core developers, we trust our hardware, we trust our cryptography, we trust that 50% of miners won't collude, we trust that societal protections will keep someone from beating us with a wrench for our keys.

I like to reason things out for myself, but I cannot prove my base assumptions, nor can I personally verify all the spiritual and behavioral guides that I need to live well. I need to outsource my reasoning to something I trust. For me the only guide that has agreed 100% with everything I can reason for myself is the Catholic Church. Maybe that is because I am a cradle catholic, but it's batting average is too good. Giving it my trust as a proxy to trusting God is practical.

So I agree, Bitcoiners need the Catholic Church, but not only as a natural fit, but also as a correction. 

 Completely agree! Naive Bitcoiners take “don't trust, verify” at face value and apply it everywhere, even though that's obviously false.