Not This Again
What a lot of nonsense the hooray for theocracy crowd does talk. Distortions, omissions, fantasies, strawmen, non sequiturs, aimless babbling – no trick is too cheap, apparently.
Resistance to politically correct attempts to expunge Christianity from our culture – the conversion of Christmas into “winterval” is symptomatic – should be encouraged, but one can push the defence of Christianity farther by imagining what Western society would be like without it…It was and is a highly cosmopolitan and egalitarian religion, recognising neither Greek nor Jew, bond nor free. That, in addition to such novel ideals as charity, compassion and peace, and the status attached to women, differentiated Christians from a surrounding society based on cruelty, hedonism and organised slavery. Imagine yourself as a slave, rather than Caesar or Cicero, in Ancient Rome, and you’ll get the hang of it.
That is absolute crap. Self-serving self-flattering crap. It is not true. That word ‘cruelty’ for instance – that’s key. It’s a great myth now that Christianity has always been the enemy of cruelty above all, but that is not true. Cruelty is not, for instance, one of the seven deadly sins, and Montaigne’s great book was put on the Index partly because he argued against the cruel torture of heretics before their execution. And as for ‘imagine yourself a slave’ – well imagine yourself a slave in ancient Alabama, too! And then when you’ve done that, read what Seneca has to say about slaves, and ponder.
And then we move on to the ‘hedonism-materialism-consumerism’ moan that seems to be the last refuge of fools like this.
The stressed-out workaholic is a slave to work and the material things labour buys. Mindless hedonism, which Christianity once successfully eradicated or sublimated, is endemic on TV. As audiences, rather than commissioning editors, grow bored with images of sexual deviancy, how long will it be before this is replaced by the equivalent of the Roman arena? “Good idea,” thinks a TV Tristram! Dan Brown’s book, consisting of bizarre conspiracy theories, is the best-selling bible of credulous housewives.
Yes, and the actual bible is the best-selling bible of credulous godbotherers. What, exactly, is the difference? There isn’t any. Burleigh just prefers his bible to the other one. Well, fine, but what’s he getting on his high horse about? Where does he get off talking about credulity? And don’t overlook the veiled coerciveness in that bit about Xianity successfully ‘eradicating’ mindless hedonism. Beware of people who like to eradicate things. Especially when they’re theocrats.
Scruffy Irish pop stars and smart chefs are the new moral arbitors, while aspiring politicians vie to demonstrate their knowledge of Radiohead or Franz Ferdinand rather than two millennia of European high culture…blahblahblah whingebleatmoan…Scientists try to cut every corner regarding what Christianity established as the sanctity of human life, or they proselytise atheism with an evangelical fervour.
More coercion. Christianity doesn’t get to ‘establish’ things, especially things that don’t mean much, and it’s crap anyway, given the number of wars and executions that have been carried out on Christianity’s watch. And more ‘you don’t get to proselytise or be credulous or have bibles, only we get to proselytise or be credulous or have bibles.’ More silly childish non-argument.
People with little or no historical knowledge of Christianity are allowed to caricature it as divisive, fraudulent or oppressive.
Er – yes. They are allowed to do that. What do you propose instead, Mr Burleigh? A long term of imprisonment? Whipping?
By the same token, Burleigh is allowed to talk vacuous canting drivel in the Times, and I’m allowed to point out what vacuous canting drivel it is. So it goes.
Where exactly does Jesus outlaw slavery? Actually he doesn’t.
There’s more of this unpleasant and dishonest crap in the observer too – from Cardinal Cormac Murphy O’Connor Sunday December 18, 2005
The Observer
Opening para:
“Have you noticed the new secular wobble? I don’t mean just the Narnia fuss over resurrected lions, and the shock discovery of a Christian sub-text in a CS Lewis novel. I mean the queasy feeling that goes hand in hand with the loss of confidence in confident rationalism. I mean the way faith keeps erupting outside the windows of secularism, interrupting the clear view of human beings as autonomous, selfish beings, with only this life to believe in.”
What exactly the f@ck is he talking about ?? ANYone ??? Is he talking about all the people round the world who instantly became converted on January 26 this year ??
He goes on “Religion never went away, of course. Some 75 per cent of Britons profess or support Christian values, and most people step at least once a year into a church, mosque or temple”. He then goes on in his benign muddle to tell us how Christ died for our sins. But the thrust is that as long as we go into some form of place of worship it’s ok. Atheists are the only real losers, and so on… until “What is new is that the rejection of religion seems increasingly dogmatic, while the search for the transcendent appears as gentle and humble as the baby in the manger.. “
That’s the search for the trascnendent that wears a jihad utility vest – That burns abortion clinics – That stomps on a decent education for huge sections of populations purely becasue of their gender – that wants gays locked up or deprived common law rights. Humble as the baby… Humble as the baby…
meant dec 26 last year … bah!
I thought that in Britain that the keep religion out of Christmas campaign has been largely successful.
I know I’m talking to the converted, but isn’t the true origin of Christmas the armed hijacking of pagan festivals where they had a party at midwinter, and forcing people not to enjoy themselves, burt instead ponder on a god that is going to kill himself for us.
And before some god-botherer says that the Romans or some Jews (not all of them of course; that would justify the pogroms carried out by those who wernt truly christian, whatever that means) killed him, how does a pack of puny humans kill an omniscient, omnipotenent entity. Not only should it be invulnerable, but should see it coming.
Remember the true meaning of Christmas; a break from the dull routine of work.
Oh, and because there is not a post (yet), well done to the Nigerian women fighting for their dignity; not the dignity that some lunatic cleric thinks they should have.
“Dan Brown’s book, consisting of bizarre conspiracy theories, is the best-selling bible of credulous housewives.
Yes, and the actual bible is the best-selling bible of credulous godbotherers. What, exactly, is the difference?”
Well the former is explicitly marketed as fiction.
“I thought that in Britain that the keep religion out of Christmas campaign has been largely successful.”
When I was a young tad, evangelicals would post billboards at this time of year asking us to put Christ back into Christmas.
Meanwhile, at Trinity College, Anglican divines were plotting to put Ishtar back into Easter.
Now cut that out, Elliott. Everybody knows that baby Jesus was born in a manger under the mistletoe decked with holly near an evergreen tree with popcorn chains draped over it, and that as soon as he was born everybody opened their presents and drank eggnog or mulled wine or cider, and that there were waffles for breakfast and turkey for dinner with mince pie after, and that it snowed, and there were like jingle bells, and reindeer, and Santa Claus, and hand-knitted sweaters, and walnuts, and no school. Nothing pagan or solsticey about it. Everybody knows that.
“Now cut that out, Elliott. Everybody knows that baby Jesus was born in a…”
Come on, OB, give him a break; there are, after all, different kinds of knowing.
But it’s disrespectful, Stewart. I can’t be doing with that.
Before I forget, OB, I hope that you (and everyone else who posts here) enjoy a salubrious Solstice, and, about two weeks after that, a perfectly wonderful perihelion.
Cheers,
Thanks, Elliott. I’m sure we all would, if it weren’t for that godawful Christmas shopping.
Same to you, Elliott. And a flagon of mead to Judge Jones. (Along with a half-ton of stale popcorn to Steve Fuller.)
Of course, religious nuts beating “immodest” women and killing gays are examples of the psotive behaviors that religion seems to encourage. Why do these writers never acknowledge this kind of behavior?