08.29.07
Keelin asks the obvious question
Hurrah. I missed the show but am catching up on newspapers and Bernice Harrison’s radio review in Saturday’s IT highlights what must’ve been an interesting moment on live radio…
“The sky didn’t fall in or anything but there was a bit of a moment this week when Keelin Shanley, sitting in for Mary Wilson (Drivetime, RTÉ Radio 1, Wednesday), suggested to Catholic primate Archbishop Seán Brady that for some people, religion – and specifically his religion – was about as reasonable as believing that Aquarians are floaty dreamers and Leos bossy wagons.
He was on air because of his sermon earlier that day, during which he had warned his flock against horoscopes, astrology, palm-reading and tarot cards. “There are people who would say,” she said, “that asking people to believe in life after death, the Immaculate Conception or even God himself is the same as believing in astrology – there is no proof in the efficacy of either.” An uncomfortable, brief silence ensued before the archbishop, who must have been seriously taken aback, mustered a not-entirely-focused rebuttal, ending with the lame “to compare the two is silly”. And this is a man who didn’t get where he is today by being a slouch on theology. But then, he probably didn’t expect to have the very basis of his faith prodded so dismissively in a teatime interview. “Believers believe that God exists,” said the archbishop simply, back on track, and, with the speed of a teenager on the way to slamming her bedroom door, Shanley replied: “I suppose that is a personal opinion.” The archbishop was always going to have the last word, this being the national broadcaster. Shortly after the interview, Shanley announced a break for the Angelus, his religion’s call to prayer.”
Good for Keelin. I suspect she was one of the few who dared to suggest what I kept thinking. Brady had said “new superstition”. What about the old?
Tomaltach said,
August 29, 2007 at 12:26 pm
The AB’s original homily was incoherent and plain silly. A shallow reading of Irish society. You’d expect better for a man of his position.
http://fichefocal.blogspot.com/2007/08/primate-and-stars-homily.html
leon said,
August 29, 2007 at 12:46 pm
It good to see someone taking on authority figures at RTE for once,
I think its time that a clear distinct was made between Catholicism and the horrors it has brought to ireland and further a field and christian belief, as espouse by Jesus (no old testament types need apply). This is important, even if you are an aethetist, the teaching of Jesus are worthy, whereas the dogma of the organised church is clearly ridiculous and primarily self serving.
Oh, for a secular society, where the religous did not seek to interfer in the strings of government and where individuals beliefs would be respected. Evangelical aethists enjoying the benefits of christian based society are almost as bad as moralising priests hiding their paedo brethren.
Conor said,
August 29, 2007 at 2:40 pm
Ah Leon that sounds like heaven….dream on. But in the mean time can we have Mary Wilson replaced by Keelin Shanley permanently! Please…
Paul Newton said,
August 29, 2007 at 4:05 pm
Fair play to Keelin,
my mate Liam sent me the following email upon reading this… I implored him to send it to the Irish Times, but I think he was a bit worried about the fundies arriving round his house
Still I enjoyed it
http://paulnewton.blogspot.com/2007/08/dont-knock-it-until-youve-tried-it.html
joseph said,
August 29, 2007 at 4:05 pm
Leon Leon Leon
When will you learn?
Gentle Jesus was at best a charlatan and a fool! It was only with the new testament that we get eternal damnation.
In any case most people in this “Christian” country are only Christian in the sense of tradition and culture – as in they were born into it. They sure as heck know little or nothing about the religion so are only religious in a nominal sense. The great triumph of this Christian culture is that we have over a long period of time been able to make it irrelevant to our real lives.
While I have no problem going along with the customs and culture/traditions of this “Christian” heritage and legacy I know it is all a load of crap and so I take great offense one level when I have to endure some “holy man” getting a platform to air his views as if anything he had to say was of any more insight or value greater than any auld geezer you might hear on a radio vox.
pop.
In point of fact this “holy man” talked a lot of rubbish while making very valid points too. However the absurdness is the idea of him giving out about superstition! His “beliefs” and “faith” is every bit as silly and deluded as anything the astrology nuts will claim to believe in. Its rather like a walmart complaining about a corner shop. They are both in the business of selling stuff!
Personally I would be happy to tell this “holly man” to fuc off and stop bothering me with his shite!But in particular keep his pontificating for his “flock” But then I am too polite and tolerant to upset the poor old guy. He cant help the fact that he was brain washed and indoctrinated into his cult from a young age and never grew up fully intellectually.
That all being said. It is true to say that the alternative to “established cults/religions are actually worse and yes all these hocus pocus new age or astrology stuff is utter rubbish. At the least the bits from Christianity which have been cherry picked out as the basis of a creed contain some great ideals and morality.
Blessed are the meek…
Turn the other cheek…
and many other nice things all have value but its only when there is a reference back to a magical jesus and or a notion a of a personal god that it all falls down and becomes insulting, annoying and plain dumb!
In
joseph said,
August 29, 2007 at 4:11 pm
“”Never underestimate people’s preparedness to believe any oul shite. Massive coverage was given in the national press today to the Supreme Grand Wizard Sean Brady or whatever the fukk he calls himself who had a go at the Tarot card readers and Astrologers of the Country. And where did he do this? Knock of all places, Knock – where a group of hallucinating peasants said they saw the mother of god on the gable end of a church. You couldn’t make it up”"
WELL SAID!
It is fucing hilarious
PaddyAnglican said,
August 29, 2007 at 6:18 pm
Leon said:
I think its time that a clear distinct was made between Catholicism and the horrors it has brought to ireland and further a field and christian belief, as espouse by Jesus (no old testament types need apply). This is important, even if you are an aethetist, the teaching of Jesus are worthy, whereas the dogma of the organised church is clearly ridiculous and primarily self serving.
Leon I AGREE – well said! Not just Catholicism but my own tradition too has lost sight of what it is about and seems to be only interested in self-preservation. The fatal flaw in the Archbishop’s address was the unquestioning identity of the Church with God. He also seems to have a notion of Church as some isolated zone of safety and security where we need to hide from the big bad world outside. I know that most reading this may not be sympathetic to Christianity but this is rubbish theology – what was the point in the incarnation if the world is a place of evil and superstition? And all of a sudden Mary seems to have become the 3rd person of the Trinity! Bizarre (not suggesting that the Trinity is an easy concept to take on board either but pointing out that this is not even orthodox)! His extensive quotations from the Cathecism are further evidence of his complete disconnect from the contemporary situation where thankfully doctrine and dogma is not swallowed unexamined and with no application of intellect. If he was hoping to convince the doubter this was a massive own-goal! Apparently it is “not religious faith that is leading people to stress and despair” – I wonder about that – Perhaps it is as you suggest that Jesus has got buried by ‘Religion’!
But the most telling comment is his assertion that “the Church still holds the answer”! That is more rubbish theology – If the Church holds the answer then it is greater than the answer and the Church is God! No wonder people are turned off by such arrogance! It makes Dawkins look tame! Why do institutional churches, my own included have to control God and access to God – Why do we build barriers instead of bridges?
And Leon also said:
Oh, for a secular society, where the religous did not seek to interfer in the strings of government and where individuals beliefs would be respected.
Leon, I have to disagree there – faith is personal but not private – there is a difference – otherwise to be consistent you have to deny the importance of faith (of whatever type and in whoever) in motivating the heroic lives of Dietrich Bonhoeffer in standing up to the Nazi regime, Martin Luther King in his struggle for the freedom of his people, and Gandhi likewise to name but a few – Theirs was genuine religion which reconciles and heals unlike the variety we see more frequently that divides and alienates.
joseph said,
August 29, 2007 at 11:31 pm
“in motivating the heroic lives of Dietrich Bonhoeffer in standing up to the Nazi regime, Martin Luther King in his struggle for the freedom of his people, and Gandhi likewise to name but a few – Theirs was genuine religion which reconciles and heals”
More rubbish! Firstly Dawkins is indeed tame. Essentially all he has said is that religion and “faith” is a bunch of balony and explained why he thinks it is. Nothing radical about that except foe the fact that as he points out faith and religion has been getting a free ride for so long that when someone happens to point out that the emperor is not wearing any cloths we see every nut and reactionary cry foul and make all manner of assertions and allegations about RD when in fact he is just articulating what many people have been thinking since they grew up and actually addressed all the faith and superstitious nonsense.
As for Herr Bonhoeffer and the others you name, well of course human beings have always been able to use all manner of mental delusion and internal mechanisms to find motivation and inspiration to do good or moral deeds. The opposite can be said of others who done awful things in the name of their faith and beliefs. The aztecs and mayans engaged in human sacrifice for jasus sake. Is that any less noble than Bonnhoeffer? Nope not really, both believed in the truth of their faith and the general good.
While we then see all the clowns come up with the trite and spurrious poijt about how all manner of evil was perpetrated in the name or by atheists like Stalin or Hitler Pol Pot or Mao etc etc such hogwash and stupidity is trult tiresome.
It is bloody obvious that the likes of Stalin and the other lads where not acting in the name or on behalf of atheists or anything that atheists would claim to be central to their belief.
There is no squaring the fact that all these absurd belief systems say they have it all right and other systems have it wrong! They are not mutually compatible and yet since the dawn of man how many faiths or belief systems have there been?
It is a question of time as to when any or all of the major religions will be replaced with something elses in terms of general adoption of the beliefs etc.
1000 years from now I imagine people will laugh at what people now claim to believe just as I am sure 1000 years more it will be something else etc.
Suggesting that there may be some overarching deity or creator of a universe we can barely even try to comprehend is laughable but arguable.
Telling people there is a personal god “keeping watch” is looney tunes stuff best suited for a cartoon. Praying is about as dumb a thing as one can imagine yet so many have been conditioned to be bogged down in the whole nonsense of religious belief
leon said,
August 30, 2007 at 8:41 am
Unlike Paddy, I believe that peoples beliefs would be best left in their private lives and that society be truly secular. However, organised religion should be attacked the basis of their hypocrisy and cruelty, rather than their faith. Attack a person on the basis of their faith or lack there of is ultimately a personal attack and is doomed to fail.
Given that the as we learn more of the cosmos, quantum and particle physics the complexity of the place seems to increase and the likelihood of a unified theory seems at best distant, it is quite possible that people will still have religion of some sort in the future, as their will always be the hole in theory that lets human nature take its course. This religion may still be judaic based, as this monotheistic basis has been around for over 3000 years, or may be some kind of Jedi force thing based on our still incomplete scientififc understanding of existence.
Science is partially based on fact, but equally based on human imagined theory, it has probably easier to be an aethist in the time that Netwonian physics held sway than in the current period of quanta.
Personally I have little faith in religion, but I also do not have faith in the current scientific explanation, to take a rhetorical stand on the righteousness of aethism based on current scientific knowledge is philosophically foolish. But believe what you want, lets concentrate our ire on the hypocrits rather than those of faith.
PaddyAnglican said,
August 31, 2007 at 10:12 am
Thanks Leon – a very balanced response to my admittedly partisan contribution
Re Quantam theory and God – not necessarially mutually exclusive.
Incidentally Sarah – some very interesting Ads coming up on your page at the moment including this :
“The Bible reveals God’s way to be forgiven and how to be saved.”
That’s the price of going commercial
leon said,
September 3, 2007 at 8:35 am
Some balance to the debate?
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2367028.ece
I imagine that Sarah must despair at a respect journalist taking such a position (perhaps his lack of university education is his undoing?)
Aethist arrogant?
PaddyAnglican said,
September 3, 2007 at 11:19 am
Interesting article Leon – Thanks for the pointer