HOMELESS , HOPELESS

I have several empty bedrooms in my house. People continue to freeze in Paris, though less than they did in the Winter of 1954 with temperatures at minus 15°C. The homeless sleep in the street, in their car, or in makeshift tents in the forest of Vincennes on the eastern side of the city. Should I offer one of our thousands of homeless a night, a week, three months in my home – before sending them back to the street ? I am told that were I to take in a homeless family I would end up, eventually, homeless myself.

God help them ! He won’t, of course. Secours Catholique, the Red Cross, the Salvation Army might and hopefully will, though some of them prefer solitude, outside, in the Winter of their discontent, to the promiscuity and risks involved in taking refuge in a hostel for the homeless.

This is a quandary for people like me with a home that is heated, comfortable, not luxurious, but potentially heaven for the homeless. It is a painful decision not to invite one or two of them to share my good fortune. I don’t blame God for their misfortune, anymore than I thank Him for my own relative comfort. I wish I could do more than send the occasional check to the charities which constantly sollicit my aid. I am sorry that I cannot, for all the obvious, inadequate, reasons, share my home with the homeless.

We live in a cruel, selfish world. The question will remain : am I my brother’s keeper ? And the answer will continue to distinguish humanity’s heroes from the rest of us. I cannot bring them – even one of them – permanently back from the land of the have-nots. So I let them freeze, while I write these lines in front of my fireplace, with a mug of steaming hot chocolate to hand. I am not the Abbé Pierre.

RIDENDA RELIGIO

EVIL . . . LIVE

Evil has always been a problem – for those of us, who, in varying degrees have had to endure it – but especially for believers. One of the gems of the Old Testament, the Book of Job, famously addresses the question of its origin and why God would permit it. Atheists know, of course, that the question is meaningless, given the non-existence of God. But we can appreciate the challenge which evil represents for those whose belief in God forces them to wonder why He allows it. The world’s literature is full of the Job Question, and believers’ answers – ranging from “we deserve what we get” to “trials are sent to test us” to “the separation of the sheep from the goats and the men from the boys” (or “answers” to that effect) – are, to be kind, simply pathetic.

But it is one thing to read about evil and its horrific dimensions in the history of mankind; it is quite another to experience it personally, or even vicariously, through the media, often in real time : evil … live ! The two words happen to be palindromes. But the reality is a frightening revelation of our vulnerability not only to the destructive foibles of nature but especially to the malice, cruelty and viciousness of our fellow human beings.

It is no wonder that Jesus taught us to pray to His and our Father (who art, He thought, in Heaven) to deliver us from omnipresent, multiform, sometimes intolerable eviL

There are no easy answers here, unless you accept the reasons Theology (a.k.a. Godology) offers. Evolution produced animals that devour others for their own survival. Nothing particularly evil, or even cruel, about that. But we humans go further. We kill, rob, rape, torture our own kind for selfish, venal, territorial reasons, but also for the most incomprehensible, meaningless and irrational of pretexts.

Believers, in their rock-solid certitude, think they have found an explanation for evil. Atheists hold that the truth is simpler than the justifications which the credulous have fabricated to let God off the hook. All of us, however, whatever our differences, have a shared interest in containing, limiting, eliminating as far as we can, the evil that is part of our human condition. Some of us, atheists and non-atheists, will even strive to make this imperfect product of Physics and Chemistry and Natural Selection a better, safer, more human place to live in.

RIDENDA RELIGIO

” ALL MY SINS ARE TAKEN AWAY “

Catholics are, or used to be, notorious for their guilt-complexes. It is hard to be virtuous but it’s as easy as hell to commit sin(s). Some of the unusual ones which terrified me as a kid and were the subject of weekly confession : receiving Holy Communion in spite of the fact that I may have swallowed a drop of water as I ran in the rain to daily Mass (“fasting” was imperative !); having impure, i.e. totally normal erotic thoughts; looking at “dirty” pictures (adolescent discovery of the beauty and attraction of the female body°; not confessing a “mortal” sin – and going to Communion nonetheless – like arriving at obligatory Sunday Mass after the Offertory (you could skip the “Liturgy of the Word”, including, mercifully, the sermon, but not a moment of the rest); telling lies (even to protect a friend at school); glancing at a fellow-student’s answers during an exam; harboring anger at sadistic teachers.

My Franciscan experience would add to the list, notably in the matter of “breaking the silence”, a “venial” sin (worthy only of Purgatory) but not a “mortal” sin, like omnipresent masturbation (worthy of hell, like murder and missing Mass on Sunday).

“O hand me down my walkin’ cane (ter),

I’m gonna catch that midnight train.

All my sins are taken away.”

Protestants are not immune to guilt-complexes, though they do not have the Sacrament of Penance and the doubtful advantage of the pardon of a priest.

“If you get to Heaven before I do (ter), .

Just bore a hole and pull me through.

All my sins are taken away”.

Is contraception a sin ? Is abortion a sin ? Is missing Mass on Sunday a sin ? Is reading “Playboy” a sin ? Sin, of course, makes no sense unless you believe in a Divine Judge, a Big Brother, Father, Whatever, who will weigh you in the balance at the Last Judgement.

Some things are wrong, damnable, unacceptable, criminal violations of others’ rights. That’s what sin is : exploitation of others – from social injustice to theft, rape, torture, slavery, murder, genocide; the list is long; Fortunately, countries dedicated to Laura Norda (remember your “Strine” : Law and Order) have, and impose, laws to protect us from such aggression. Sometimes, not always, human justice works. But God and His supposed laws and commandments have nothing to do with it. Break the law, violate the rights of your fellow-travelers on this minor planet, and, with luck, you will suffer the consequences. Here and now. Not in some imaginary afterlife. Heaven, Hell and God do not exist. But here on Earth, decent people will condemn and punish infractions of others’ rights. We have no need of a divine Judge, nor His threats of eternal punishment. We, or at least some of us, have evolved to a level of moral consciousness where “sin” is meaningless but where crime will not be tolerated.

RIDENDA RELIGIO

MY POST ON SUICIDE APPROVED AND EXPANDED BY A PSYCHIATRIST

Many readers of this blog are familiar with the name – and the several guest-posts he has contributed – of Doctor Peter Evans, a former Australian Franciscan priest like myself, who became an articulate atheist and a practising psychiatrist, well-known in Melbourne and renowned throughout the country for his professional testimony in the Royal Commission on the crimes of pedophile priests and members of religious orders. He was kind enough to send me a long e-mail concerning my post on Suicide, which he has allowed me to share with you.

***********

“Needless to say, Frank, I agree with everything you said. In Australia we have long held the view that suicide is not an offense, and we now have ‘assisted dying’ well established by law. Suicide is clearly an option for some people, although from a psychiatric point of view I have seen many who were suicidal because of a treatable psychiatric illness. With regard to those who choose suicide rationally and the social response to it, I’ll give you a couple of examples.”

Peter then spells out at length the story of an 80 year-old woman, a former Catholic become an atheist, interviewed on TV some ten years ago :

“She gave rational explanations as to why, at the end of life, any decision as to its future was entirely hers. She did not believe in God and her life was her own. It was one of the most enlightening interviews that I have heard on TV. Needless to say, it received no comment from anyone. My experience is that people are very reluctant to speak out publicly on this matter. And this is so even though they completely agree (80%) with our ‘assisted dying’ laws which, incidentally, are gradually extended State by State. The reason is difficult to understand but I think it is related to an inborn horror at the end of life and the inability to have the courage to face the fact that we are all here by chance alone, and that one day we will cease to exist and that the memory of us will, after a further period of time, also cease to exist. It takes courage and clear thinking to do that. Anyway, whatever the reason, suicide is shrouded in silence. There was a brief report about twelve months later. When friends tried to telephone her, they heard the message : ‘I’m sorry I can’t take your call; I have departed on a journey from which I will never return’. That was the suicide of a rational mind at the end of a fruitful life.

“Here’s another more recent story. One morning I read the brief obituary of a vascular surgeon (I’ll call him James Anon) whom I had met at a regular luncheon of medical professionals. He came along twice, and on both occasions I was seated next to him. We ended up talking at great length about the end of professional life and the end of life generally. He reminded me very much of the lady that I mentioned earlier. He was certainly not depressed and was thinking quite clearly. I thought to myself at the time that he was someone who could very rationally end his own life and had both the knowledge and the capability to do so.

“Six months after our last luncheon, his obituary simply stated : ‘James Anon wishes to announce to all his friends and interested colleagues that he has passed away at the weekend. There will be a private funeral.’ An hour and a half later, when I tried to have another look at the obituary, it had been removed – presumably by family members. It seems very likely that no colleagues saw James’ own obituary notice.

“It seems to me, Frank, that society is not able to tolerate suicide being published. Subsequently, there was a large memorial service for James, attended by at least three or four hundred colleagues. About fifteen colleagues spoke about his life (there was even an interval halfway through !). But there was not one word about his death. Many must have eventually known about it. I have heard no mention of it since that time. Even sophisticated societies and well-educated people are uncomfortable with suicide. That’s just the reality at the present time.

“Anyway, Frank, well said on your part. You can edit, publish or trash anything I write.”

P.S. In the name of the many, many readers, now and in years to come, who will consider themselves privileged to read Peter’s post – and in my own name : Thank you, Doctor Evans !

RIDENDA RELIGIO

SUICIDE

Suicide should be considered a fundamental human right, not a crime. Within, of course, certain limits. It is hard to accept that Japanese High School students end their lives because of disappointing scholastic results. It is probably impossible for non-Japanese to appreciate the cultural pressure of hara-kiri in a society where Presidents of companies commit suicide when they go bankrupt, just as did their compatriot army officers in World War 2, who considered themselves to be obliged to commit atrocious, excruciatingly painful suicide in face of the disgrace of defeat.

In our own Western societies, we continue to be shocked, overwhelmed with a feeling of impotence, when a family member, a friend or a professional colleague decides to take his or her own life. We may even wonder whether we are at fault, whether we could have, should have, done something to prevent it.

Some people may on occasion wonder whether it would be better for them personally, as the cliché has it, to end it all. They are not terminally ill, not forced to suffer intolerable pain. They are simply (?) seriously, pathologically depressed. Surely there is someone they can turn to, a member of the family, a friend, a neighbor, a professional in whom they have confidence. But these are rational considerations, meaningless in someone determined to put an end to his or her life. Some situations are, literally, hopeless. People who really want to commit suicide usually succeed.

People who do not suffer from such suicidal depression, both believers and non-believers (non-atheists and atheists) often – fortunately – hesitate to take the irrevocable step. The former for reasons theological : “Thou shalt not kill … ” anyone, beginning with yourself. The latter, for more pragmatic reasons : suicide is a messy business. Even if it does not involve the use of arms, the consequences are devastating for family and friends. Do I have the right to inflict such pain and torment on others ? A weighty question.

Two specific situations pose even more ponderous problems. The first : how can anyone justify the kamikaze pilots at Pearl Harbor, their Vietcong counterparts in the Tet Offensive, contemporary multiple suicide-bombings in the Middle East and other countries, including India and South-East Asia, and – above all – the horror of 9/11 ? The second : euthanasia.

The two situations are obviously incomparable. Blind fanaticism is the root of the former, enlightened realism the root of the other. Education is necessary in both cases. Fanatical, terrorist suicide, accompanied by deliberate mass-murder, can be limited, in the short term, by draconian measures of security. In the long term, only patient pedagogy will prevail in getting terrorists to realize the criminal, inhuman folly of their acts.

As for euthanasia, education is also imperative. It must be aimed at individuals, families and governments who still oppose the basic human right to end meaningless suffering.

“God”, as usual, has nothing to do with this question, except in the minds of those unfortunates who continue to believe that He will condemn them to Hell if they take their own lives. For the rest of us, such decisions deserve serious reflection. Not because of some imagined, divine commandment, but because of the intrinsic dignity and value of every human person, and the consequences for others of such a decision.

RIDENDA RELIGIO

STONE THE CROWS !

One cannot but wonder at, if not admire, the depth of devotion and the firmness of faith of the two million disciples of the Prophet who celebrate the Hadj each year during this their perhaps once-in-a-lifetime pilgrimage to Mecca. In spite of the cost, as well as the physical danger to life and limb from the sheer numbers of pilgrims in such a confined space, these believers feel their pilgrimage is not just a duty of their Islamic faith, but a privilege to be able to make such a proclamation of their obviously sincere belief in Allah and His Prophet.

Catholics have Lourdes, Fatima, Compostella, the Holy Land and a Polish Black Virgin, to name just a few of their favorite pilgrimages. But none can rival the Hadj.

The symbolic stoning of the Devil is not the least spectacular feature of the Hadj. To Christians, even those who still believe in the Devil – and their name is not Legion – there is something quaint, almost childish, about this ritual. For those of the Jewish faith, who once practised stoning not as a symbol but as a form of execution, as some Muslim communities still do today, it is no doubt an uncomfortable reminder of their ancestors’ belief in both the Devil and the rôle of the righteous in executing sinners.

The rituals of both Christians and Jews are impregnated with symbolism. Symbols, especially those which are the subject of collective, community and even family celebrations, are powerful pedagogical vehicles. Even those unable to read and write, can comprehend immediately the rituals of the Sabbath and of the Christian sacraments and sacramentals. Lent and its culmination in the Holy Week ceremonies before Easter are magnificent, creative manifestations – and reinforcers – of Christian faith. From the ashes marked on foreheads on Ash Wednesday to the washing of the feet on Holy Thursday, the shrouding of the statues on Good Friday, the lighting of the fire from flint (the rock covering the tomb of Christ) at the Easter Vigil, and the explosion of light as Christians celebrate Jesus’ Resurrection on Easter Sunday, symbols express and propagate the Faith.

The Mass, the Eucharist, is, of course, the supreme example. The night before He died, Jesus, clairvoyant martyr and self-declared Light of the World, could see what was about to happen, with or without the benefit of divine insight. The story is as moving as it is tragic. The symbolic ritual which gives permanent existence to the pre-enactment of His physical sacrifice the next day, has been the center of Catholic faith for two thousand years. Protestants have protested about the belief in the “Real Presence” of Jesus in the consecrated bread and wine, but what a symbol was, and is, this !

Baptism uses the fundamental element of water – one of the four basic elements identified from time immemorial – and succeeds in teaching the belief not only of cleansing from (Original) sin, but of the giving of new life. Extreme Unction, the Last Anointing, uses oil to symbolize the giving of strength and comfort for the Last Journey, aided by Viaticum, the body and blood of Christ in Holy Communion.

Christians and Jews should be prudent in criticizing Muslim faith and practice. Symbolism is at the heart of all three of the world’s major religions. For the atheist, of course, all this is ONLY symbolism. For the believer, it is a reminder of a supposed reality. S/he with eyes to see, let her/him see.

P.S. For readers unfamiliar with Australian idiom, “Stone the Crows” (like “Starve the Lizards”) is an expression of surprise, like “Would you believe ?” or “Well, for cryin’ out loud !” But the astute non-Aussie reader already cottoned on to that.

RIDENDA RELIGIO

LAURA NORDA

Allow me to introduce you to this lovely lady from Down Under. Her name is well-known to readers from my native country, where we pronounce English differently. Even the word “Australian” comes out as … “Strine” ! (“You talk French; I talk Strine”.) This is the designation we give to the unique idiom of the Terra Incognita, declared “Terra Nullius” by the Brits who stole it some 250 years ago from its owners who had occupied it for the previous 60,000 years.

Other English-speakers cannot be expected to comprehend our pride in some of Sydney’s “Gloria Soames” (glorious homes), our optimistic affirmation “Scona rain” (it is going to rain), or questions like “Emma Chisit ?” (how much is it ?), and the more personal, perhaps impertinent, “Jew believe in God ?”, which is neither an anti-semitic slur, nor a misprint, not a grammatical error, but our way of asking : “Do you believe in God ?”

Laura Norda, non-Australians will have now unnerstood, is “Law and Order”.

There are those who suggest that without belief in God there can be no foundation for law and moral order. Why bother keeping the Commandments if God did not dictate them, if there is no day of reckoning, no Last Judgement ? What motivation could an atheist possibly have for not ripping off his neighbor’s goods and/or wife, if not – should he so desire, as Jack did – ripping out her throat ?

Their belief in God, believers believe, justifies their moral stance and provides the indispensable foundation for a just society. Such a point of view, such a crutch, in the eyes of the atheist, is unworthy of the men and women we are. I don’t need to believe in God to recognize the rights of my fellow-mortals and of my duty towards them. “Love God”, said Saint Augustine, “and do what you will”. Presumably the 4th century Doctor of Doctors meant that if you love God you will choose to do only what is right. But you don’t need to love, or even believe in, a Divine Delusion to treat others, flesh and blood people like yourself, as you prefer they treat you. Dog eat dog, the survival of the fittest, might is right, your money or your life, renounce your faith or I’ll burn you at the stake, speak down the barrel please, are – to the atheist, as surely they must be to the “enlightened” believer – abominations, an insult to the humanity we share.

Perhaps we could agree at least on this : you say you respect me and my dignity, my intrinsic value and my inalienable rights because, like you, I am a child of God (even if I deny His existence). I respect you because you are a child, not of a a non-existent God but of a father and mother like my own. Whatever the motivation, our survival depends on our recognition of our shared value and interdependence.

Laura Norda is a lady who has no need of God.

RIDENDA RELIGIO

DIVINE INSPIRATION : AN AMERICAN FOOTNOTE

Credulity can sometimes be pretty frightening. The man TIME (January 15, 2007, European edition, pp.24-25) called “the other born-again President”, Jerry Ford, did not, like probably insincere Tricky Dick Nixon and possibly George W. Bush, wear his religion on his presidential sleeve. But it is now revealed that Ford, converted by a gospel-film executive named Billy Zeoli, not only appreciated the 146 “devotionals” sent to him by Zeoli every week thoughout his presidency, but said of them : “Not only were they profound in their meaning and judicious in their selection. I believe they were also divinely inspired”. Luckily (thank God ?) the devotionals seem not to have contained divinely inspired directives to assassinate atheists and authors, clearly not divinely inspired, of blogs like this. (What am I saying ? Nowhere on the planet is there a blog like the one you are reading !)

RIDENDA RELIGIO

THE BIBLE : Hallucination 95% , Edification 5% , Inspiration 0%

The Bible would not be the best-selling book that it is, were it all as boring as certain chapters of “Levititicus”, or as incomprehensible as the ravings of “The Book of Revelation” (the “Apocalypse”). It is, in fact, not A book (“biblos”) but two collections of books in a veritable library of writings sacred to Jews and Christians. It contains some of the most memorable stories, myths, legends, heroic deeds, expressions of wisdom, exquisite poetry, pathos and drama the world has ever known, but also not a few divinely-decreed violations of basic human rights and instances of cruelty and vengeance of divine dimensions, without, moreover, the slightest trace of humor – confirmation of the fact that laughter is indeed an exclusively human attribute, of which the Deity is devoid. While it is sometimes inspiring, the Bible never was inspired, at least in the strict sense of being the product of Divine Revelation.

Divine Revelation, lest we forget, is predicated on the existence of a Divinity, capable of, willing and ready to take the necessary steps, to … reveal. If there is no God, there can be no Divine Revelation. Some believers, given to thinking in circles, curiously short-circuit basic logic in professing belief in God because of His … “Revelation” ! The clever gambit here is to get people to believe that what presumably well-meaning, even gifted but deluded biblical authors wrote, is nothing less than the dictated, or at least inspired, Word of God.

God, for many people, is a given, self-evident fact. Better yet, the Good News is that He decided to talk to us, to let us in on His plan for the world and for each one of us (though “in a glass, darkly”), to show us the Way to the Truth and the Light. This inspired “Revelation” may not always be terribly clear, it is not without its internal contradictions, and, curiously, it is decreed to have come to a sudden halt after an unknown Christian writer, at the end of the first century of our era, wrote the psychotic saga which is the final, apocalyptic book of our Bible.

God supposedly chose certain prophets and evangelists (bearers of Good News) as His spokesmen (there were obviously no women involved . . .). What you have in these texts is His very Word. Infallible. Unquestionable. Inspired. Amen.

Now I don’t mean to be skeptical, but how exactly do we know that these texts are inspired — I mean, compared with other texts that could be considered candidates for the “Appellation Contrôlée” (like French wines) of being “divinely inspired” ? What were the criteria for accepting some ancient texts as the Word of God, and excluding others as “apocrypha” ?

Well, you see, the authorities of the Synagogue and of the Church, all honorable men (no women, of course), all erudite, holy, exemplary and totally objective in their learned judgement, spent weeks, months, years debating the matter, and finally came up with the “CANON”, the official, permanently frozen, unalterable, definitive and final list of the Canonical Books, which is to say those, and only those, which bear the unmistakeable mark of … divine inspiration. The ultimate criterion for both the Jewish and Christian canons apparently came down to the following : “If enough people believe the book was inspired, then it was”. Q.E.D.

Convinced ? If you’re not, you’re a heretic or worse. Bodies of Jewish and later Christian representatives of God Almighty (another begging of the question) have decreed the divine origin of their separate Canons. Long before the unfortunate 19th century dogma of Papal Infallibility, the list of the Bible’s Inspired Books (with Catholic and Protestant variations, mind you) is therefore set in divine concrete. You better believe it !

RIDENDA RELIGIO

A MODERN SAINT , HUMANIST AND HERO : L’Abbé Pierre

“Thou art Peter – tu es Pierre – thou art a rock, and upon this Rock I will build my Church – et sur cette Pierre je bâtirai mon Eglise”.

He died, aged 94, January 22, 2007. Abbé Pierre had prayed every day of his life for the grace of dying young. He saw death as the Great Meeting with his Friend, the beginning of “les Grandes Vacances”, eternal holidays in Heaven. God disappointed him by letting him live so long. In such poor health as a young man that he was obliged to leave the Franciscan Capuchin Order he had joined, to become a simple secular (diocesan) priest, and later the legendary French Resistant (code-name “Abbé Pierre”), parlementarian, courageous, exemplary founder of Emmäus – the worldwide institution he created to provided shelter, work and dignity for the homeless – anti-clerical France’s favorite celebrity, though a Catholic priest and fervent believer until his death, which was declared a day of national mourning.

The faith of Henri Douès, a 20th century Francesco Bernadone, l’Abbé Pierre clearly puts into question the atheism and egoism of the rest of us, especially of a former Franciscan priest like myself. How could Abbé Pierre be so blind ? OK, he admitted publicly that he had had sexual relations – just once in his life – and upbraided the Vatican for its intransigence on condoms, the only presently available protection against Aids. But he was a “sacerdos in aeternum” (“a priest forever”), faithful to the end. What if he, Mother Teresa, Soeur Emmanuel, St Francis of Assisi, St Vincent de Paul, Martin Luther King and the billions of Christian believers were right, after all, and we, blind atheists, were wrong ?

Sorry, but I am about to disappoint believer-readers. With the unlimited admiration I have for believing philanthropists and for the religious altruists who devote their lives to others, as did Abbé Pierre, I continue to affirm that their faith is unfounded. They are human “saints”, examples of and for humanity at its most noble and selfless level. But their God is still a figment of their imagination. L’Abbé Pierre, fortunately, will never know how right and how wrong he was. Right to give his life to combatting poverty, to castigating our criminal indifference to the poor, the homeless, the human rubbish of our unjust world “community”. Wrong, totally wrong, about the existence of a God he somehow excused for His apparent indifference to, or at least, failure to intervene in favor of people like the poor Parisian woman whose death by freezing in the street during the Winter of 1954 provoked his storming into a radio-station and screaming his outrage to the nation.

The life, mission, dedication, selflessness, and heroism of this exemplary French priest will continue to reinforce the faith of believers, and trouble the atheism of people like me. But even a rock like Abbé Pierre is no foundation for believing in a God our imaginations have invented.

RIDENDA RELIGIO