Israellycool

Down Under Punditry in the Middle East

December 2nd, 2007

Papal Offense

';

Aussie Dave

Just days after a Vatican official came out with an incredibly offensive endorsement of the bogus “palestinian right of return,” we now have to be subjected to more offensiveness from Pope Benedict XVI (aka Joseph Alois Ratzinger, not to be confused with that guy from Cheers).

Pope Benedict XVI strongly criticized atheism in a major document released Friday, saying it had led to some of the “greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice” ever known.

—-

In the 76-page document, Benedict elaborated on how the Christian understanding of hope had changed in the modern age, when man sought to relieve the suffering and injustice in the world. Benedict points to two historical upheavals: the French Revolution and the proletarian revolution instigated by Karl Marx.

Benedict sharply criticizes Marx and the 19th and 20th century atheism spawned by his revolution, although he acknowledges that both were responding to the deep injustices of the time.

“A world marked by so much injustice, innocent suffering and cynicism of power cannot be the work of a good God,” he wrote. But he said the idea that mankind can do what God cannot by creating a new salvation on Earth was “both presumptuous and intrinsically false.”

“It is no accident that this idea has led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice,” he wrote. “A world which has to create its own justice is a world without hope.

He specifically cited Vladimir Lenin, the founder of the Soviet Union, and the “intermediate phase” of dictatorship that Marx saw as necessary in the revolution.

“This ‘intermediate phase’ we know all too well, and we also know how it then developed, not ushering in a perfect world, but leaving behind a trail of appalling destruction,” Benedict wrote.

“The pope’s concern is that you have secularizing forces that are trying to eliminate religion from public and private life,” said Monsignor Robert Wister, professor of church history at Seton Hall University in the United States.

“In most countries, political Marxism is dead (but) philosophical Marxism is very much alive and it fuels the secularizing philosophy often seen in Europe and North America,” Wister said.

Now don’t get me wrong. I believe wholeheartedly in one G-d. And I agree that supplanting the belief in a just G-d with a man-made ideology can have devastating consequences. However, it does not automatically follow - there are plenty of decent atheists in the world. Furthermore, I find it highly offensive that the Pope would single out atheism as leading to some of the “greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice,” without acknowledging that the dogma of some monotheistic religions - his included - has also led to such cruelty and violations of justice, including anti-Semitism, the Crusades, and the Inquisition.

What makes this all the more galling is the fact that the Pope did see the need to be self-critical, yet only came up with this:

At the same time, Benedict also looks critically at the way modern Christianity had responded to the times, saying such a “self-critique” was also necessary.

“We must acknowledge that modern Christianity, faced with the successes of science in progressively structuring the world, has to a large extent restricted its attention to the individual and his salvation,” he wrote. “In doing so, it has limited the horizon of its hope and has failed to recognize sufficiently the greatness of its task.”

The Christian concept of hope and salvation, he says, was not always so individual-centric.

There’s a huge elephant in the room, but the Pope seems to have his hunting rifle handy.

Either that, or he’s just being forgetful again.

Sphere: Related Content

admin

An Australian immigrant to Israel, Aussie Dave has been blogging since early 2003.

Tags: Christianity

4 Responses to “Papal Offense”

  1. Gravatar

    Last time the Pope said something, quoting, another religion, he got himself a fatwa, which could be in effect still by those he’s defending as far as I know. If I recall correctly, that last pope had a real “good time” around the ancient churches around Israel by them also.

  2. Gravatar

    The document (encyclical) “Spe salvi” is not 76 pages long. Only 26 A4 (including source list) printed out from the Vatican website. Why don’t you read the entire document? You seem to be quoting from reviewers.

    Spe salvi is a very good piece of work. And about the tired cliché, repeated ad nauseam in the MSM and on some blogs like a knee jerk reaction: this pope and the one before and others before HIM had repeatedly confessed and asked for forgiveness for the ills of the crusades and every other conceivable “sin” done by previous Christians, including anti-semitism. These words of contrition are even on record in Papal documents and EVERYONE who is well-informed knows about it. Christians are fully informed about the history of Christianity: we’re not allowed to forget what some of our Chrsitian ancestors did…..

    No religion is perfect, at least not in its human manifestation and in the life and deeds of certain of its so called adherents. That is why we need G-d. And the pope is correct about atheism. He did not say all atheists are “bad” either, by the way.

  3. Gravatar

    Margaret,

    You say Pope Benedict has “repeatedly confessed and asked for forgiveness for the ills of the crusades and every other conceivable “sin” done by previous Christians, including anti-semitism”. Perhaps you could point me to the relevant place(s) so I can see for myself.

    Even if everything you said is true - and I remain skeptical until I see it with my own eyes - why won’t the Vatican return the Jewish artefacts they have stolen over the ages?

  4. Gravatar

    I would be willing to compromise and simply ask that the Vatican opens up all of its vaults of artifacts and manuscripts of every kind for the entire world to see and study.

    What could an organization which promotes an axiom like “the truth will set you free” have to hide?

    Or should I answer that?

Leave a Reply