HOW CAN WE CONTEND WITH THE LEGACY OF KAROL WOTYLA?
I have no hesitation in identifying myself as a secular humanist, with all that implies. As such, the uncritical adulation heaped on Karol Wotyla (aka John Paul II) is a much needed reminder for us to look closely at what is happening in our world(s). There is no doubt that Wotyla was steadfastly opposed to modernism, secular humanism and liberalism. He used his power to unite and cleanse the catholic hierarchy, and then sought to refound the church in Africa, Asia and Latin America. In this way, he sought to counterbalance any perceived threat from what he saw as European liberal heresy.
Worse, in many respects, was the unholy alliance that he created with evangelical protestantism in the USA. As usual in such situations, this bizarre coalition aimed at opposing rather than supporting. In other words, it was an expedient process, aimed at excluding the democrats under the catholic John Kerry. This was to allow George W Bush to continue his conservative, freedom denying rule to the satisfaction of reactionary catholics and evangelists. And to the frustration of life enhancing liberal secular humanists.
All cannot be joy for the catholic hierarchy. Empty pews, a seemingly unstoppable reduction in candidates for the priesthood and the knowledge that many catholics are prepared to think for themselves ought to give pause to the power brokers of the Vatican. But maybe this is just a Euro-centric view. I think perhaps not. If those in Asia, Africa and Latin America come to realise that much that the church claims cannot be turned into reality, the euphoria following Wotyla’s death may well turn out to be mistaken. I certainly hope so.
The absolutism inherent in religious dogma far from supports a culture of life. It is more aimed at a culture of obedience. It turns, “I believe” into “you should”, then “you should not”, then yet worse, “you must”. Adamant opposition by Wotyla and his acolytes to contraception, gay marriage (or gay anything), abortion, stem cell research and euthanasia, to say nothing of married priests or the whole issue of women in the church, highlights a culture of obedience. That this is a life denying culture rather than a culture of life is well observed in the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa where Catholic dogma has denied the opportunity for prevention through the use of condoms. And the new Benedict XVI is unlikely to be in the forefront of significant change.
There seems to be a supreme irony in suggestions that John Paul was at the forefront of the war against communism and its ultimate downfall. Everything we read about Joshua ben Joseph (aka Jesus Christ) suggests that he was truly the first communist. So is it too much to suggest that Wotyla set out to destroy that which the founder of his religion believed in and preached?
Religious, and particularly Catholic belief, has one huge and extraordinarily powerful value. It provides a security for believers that, by its very nature, secular humanism can’t. If you believe, confess your sins and show contrition, all will be well and you will go to heaven when you die. Secular humanism doesn’t offer this comforting myth, but requires that we do the best we can for ourselves – and for everyone else - while we’re here. Because nobody, but nobody knows, as a matter of fact, what happens after we leave. And to seek the mystery, spirituality and beauty in our world, doing all we can to make it better and to save it from the predations of those who demand, “we know best”.
And it's also worth remembering that, the most delusional fantasies can be made to masquerade as sanity if you've got the political power to reinforce them (Penny Skillman). If the Roman Catholic church isn't a living, breathing definition of political power, I'd like to know what is.
I have no hesitation in identifying myself as a secular humanist, with all that implies. As such, the uncritical adulation heaped on Karol Wotyla (aka John Paul II) is a much needed reminder for us to look closely at what is happening in our world(s). There is no doubt that Wotyla was steadfastly opposed to modernism, secular humanism and liberalism. He used his power to unite and cleanse the catholic hierarchy, and then sought to refound the church in Africa, Asia and Latin America. In this way, he sought to counterbalance any perceived threat from what he saw as European liberal heresy.
Worse, in many respects, was the unholy alliance that he created with evangelical protestantism in the USA. As usual in such situations, this bizarre coalition aimed at opposing rather than supporting. In other words, it was an expedient process, aimed at excluding the democrats under the catholic John Kerry. This was to allow George W Bush to continue his conservative, freedom denying rule to the satisfaction of reactionary catholics and evangelists. And to the frustration of life enhancing liberal secular humanists.
All cannot be joy for the catholic hierarchy. Empty pews, a seemingly unstoppable reduction in candidates for the priesthood and the knowledge that many catholics are prepared to think for themselves ought to give pause to the power brokers of the Vatican. But maybe this is just a Euro-centric view. I think perhaps not. If those in Asia, Africa and Latin America come to realise that much that the church claims cannot be turned into reality, the euphoria following Wotyla’s death may well turn out to be mistaken. I certainly hope so.
The absolutism inherent in religious dogma far from supports a culture of life. It is more aimed at a culture of obedience. It turns, “I believe” into “you should”, then “you should not”, then yet worse, “you must”. Adamant opposition by Wotyla and his acolytes to contraception, gay marriage (or gay anything), abortion, stem cell research and euthanasia, to say nothing of married priests or the whole issue of women in the church, highlights a culture of obedience. That this is a life denying culture rather than a culture of life is well observed in the HIV/AIDS epidemic in Africa where Catholic dogma has denied the opportunity for prevention through the use of condoms. And the new Benedict XVI is unlikely to be in the forefront of significant change.
There seems to be a supreme irony in suggestions that John Paul was at the forefront of the war against communism and its ultimate downfall. Everything we read about Joshua ben Joseph (aka Jesus Christ) suggests that he was truly the first communist. So is it too much to suggest that Wotyla set out to destroy that which the founder of his religion believed in and preached?
Religious, and particularly Catholic belief, has one huge and extraordinarily powerful value. It provides a security for believers that, by its very nature, secular humanism can’t. If you believe, confess your sins and show contrition, all will be well and you will go to heaven when you die. Secular humanism doesn’t offer this comforting myth, but requires that we do the best we can for ourselves – and for everyone else - while we’re here. Because nobody, but nobody knows, as a matter of fact, what happens after we leave. And to seek the mystery, spirituality and beauty in our world, doing all we can to make it better and to save it from the predations of those who demand, “we know best”.
And it's also worth remembering that, the most delusional fantasies can be made to masquerade as sanity if you've got the political power to reinforce them (Penny Skillman). If the Roman Catholic church isn't a living, breathing definition of political power, I'd like to know what is.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home