Tuesday, January 26, 2010

Papal Bull

A Papal Bull is a formal letter or decree written by the pope and sealed with a device called a Bulla. These papal missives have been disseminated this way for centuries, beginning in the sixth CE. The name Papal Bull, however, did not come into use officially until the fifteenth century.


I won't be discussing that type of Papal Bull today.


When Karol Wojtila became Pope John Paul II on October 16, 1978, he was widely regarded as the pope who would reform the Catholic church and finally bring some modernity to its ancient superstitions. It is widely accepted that he largely helped to end the rule of the communist party in his home country of Poland. Lech Walesa and Solidarity have contributed more significantly in my opinion, but church leaders will embellish whatever they think will aggrandize their particular version of Christianity.


His contribution to the Church included a general rapprochement with Judaism, a reduction in the requirements of beatification and sainthood, doing away with the office of advocatus diaboli, devil's advocate, and reducing the number of required "miracles" for sainthood to just two. The strict requirement for these miracles to be proven has also been softened so that now just about anyone can be canonised, even John Paul himself. 
John Paul II also further entrenched his church in the workings of human sexuality and sexual politics, strengthening its position against homosexuality, abortion and contraception.
The pope's views on contraception in particular has resulted in millions of unwanted children being born as a result of the failure of the church condoned "Catholic Roulette", or the rhythm method of contraception. The amount of misery, disease and crime that this practice has caused may never fully be understood.


Further to his inappropriate, in my view, attention to matters of sexuality, was his blanket injunction against the use of condoms, even within marriage. This insistence on abstinence as the solution to the spread of AIDS in Africa and South America is responsible for the deaths of millions during John Paul II's reign and is the main reason that I, and many other liberals condemn his memory.
That his acts in this regard are despicable is one thing, but his successor, Joseph Ratzinger, has compounded the problem further by making this statement on a trip to Cameroon in March 2009, "(AIDS is) a tragedy that cannot be overcome by money alone, that cannot be overcome through the distribution of condoms, which even aggravates the problems."


Aggravates, one might think, is Vatican-speak for "makes better".


Monday, January 18, 2010

Mo'Nique's Hairy Legs

Mo'Nique, winner of the best supporting actress award for her role as an abusive mother in the movie Precious, has "commentators" in an uproar with her outrageous behaviour. She doesn't shave her legs. And she's a woman.

As well as that, she has the temerity to show them off at he the Golden Globes. In front of, like, you know, everyone.
Really? People have hair? Well, men do, that's fine and dandy. Women are supposed to depilate scrupulously so as not to offend.

The reaction is even more underwhelming when we have real issues like the humanitarian crisis in Haiti, war in Afghanistan, Global Financial Crisis, Famine, Injustice, AIDS, Condom Deniers (I've got you in mind, pontiff), Vaccine Deniers, I could go on and on.

A woman's hairy legs cause a stir.

Get. A. Life.

Thursday, January 14, 2010

Good? Who is good?

Today I spent a considerable amount of time viewing the tragedy unfolding in the aftermath of the 7 magnitude earthquake that leveled swaths of Haiti and the Dominican Republic.
It's not easy to watch the suffering without feeling enormous compassion for the victims. I certainly had some welling of tears in my eyes.

So then, how do other people react when confronted by such human misery. Surely men of God, react with compassion, love, and an earnest desire to do what Jesus would have wanted them to do.

Most of us react, I have to believe, in the same way even if we don't believe in the divinity or even existence of Jesus. We are wired, by evolution or design (whatever floats your boat), to care for those around us. This is entirely normal, we see these people and recognise ourselves in them. We feel compassion because they are like us and we understand that on a visceral level.

What then of Pat Robertson?

In case you don't know, Pat Robertson is a U.S. televangelist who with Jerry Falwell claimed in 2001 that the events of 9-11 were the direct result of God's anger at homosexuals and Feminists and Abortionists. http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/f/falwell-robertson-wtc.htm

He now claims that the Earthquake in Haiti is the consequence of some pact with the devil that Haitians made way back in the early 1800's when they were slaves to the French. How he know this, he doesn't say. I suppose it might have come to him in a vision-or something.


He's not all indifferent to the suffering though. As if we needed to be reminded of his deep compassion for his fellow human being, he also concluded his interview on the Christian Broadcasting Network by asking viewers to send donations for his Haitian relief effort. That at least is good, right?

Well, maybe not so good if history is any indication, and I quote:
"Robertson was investigated by the Commonwealth of Virginia's Office of Consumer Affairs, which determined that he had "willfully induced contributions from the public through the use of misleading statements and other implications" when he asked for support for Rwandan refugees, but used the money to airlift mining equipment from the diamond mines he had started with Zaire dictator Mobuto Sese Seko."

So Pat Robertson does smell a little rancid. Surely he is alone among religious leaders. The Pope surely, as the leader of some 2 billion Catholics must be a man of exceptional goodness ...

Let's deal with him in another post.

Tuesday, January 12, 2010

Arrrgh! Mary $@*&#^%$!' MacKillop

Is it possible to hear and read the simple-minded blatherings of the "faithful" about the impending canonisation of "Blessed Mary" without feeling the strong urge to void one's stomach?

For me it is not.

Is it tolerable that mainstream news outlets, prattle on about so-called miracles that this dead nun allegedly performed?
Is it appropriate that reporters treat the stories of miraculous cure as fact?
Is it appropriate that reasoned and sceptical challenges to these stories are not being publicised or promoted by the media at large?

No. No. No.

Then how is it that Mary MacKillop has been given the credit for a fortunate woman's remission from cancer. Remission from end-stage cancer is relatively rare, sure, but it does happen. In fact, it is because there are so many cases of intractable cancer in the world, that it happens all the time.

Is there any justification offered for these claims? Well, if you count close-ups of the person in question's magic Mary MacKillop charm, yes.
However, if you rely on science, reason, analysis and evidence, the answer has to be no. This is an anecdote and as Dr. Mark Crislip is fond of repeating, "The plural of anecdote is not evidence, it's anecdotes." The Catholic hierarchy has two, count 'em, two anecdotes that it regards as evidence that dead Mary is a saint.

How did this woman know that she had cancer? How did she know that her cancer was dangerously close to killing her? I expect that she might have been seeing, you know, doctors about her condition. Sure she prayed to her magic dead nun for succour, but did she stop her medication? I don't think she did. Not that I know she didn't, but one would have to be crazy to stop taking the medicine.

There is a site believers can go to to test their faith in these miracles; it is called Why won't God heal amputees?

So, next time I read about a miracle that the Catholic church has verified, it'd better be some ex-amputee dancing.

I'll not hold my breath.