I must be mellowing. Instead of the Grumpy Old Man I used to be – until yesterday – I find I am becoming less aggressive. Not exactly Mister Nice Guy, nor, I hope, a pundit or punster losing his punch, pertinence and perspicacity. I am unlikely ever to become wise, but I may, with age, be becoming more realistic.
I have always known, and have written here, that my magnificent mantra is misleading and overly optimistic. Religion will probably never be destroyed. It should be, because as Hitch insisted it poisons everything, whence the gerundive I borrowed from Carthage’s nemesis, Cato the Elder : “Delenda Religio”. The destruction of religion, as opposed to the destiny of the Empire’s arch-enemy, is no doubt an impossible dream, whence the more reasonable, realizable “Ridenda Religio”. Religion, the Divine Comedy, deserves to be laughed at (you can quote me …).
The occasional blog-browser may miss this announcement and not even notice that the mantra at the end of each post has changed. I will continue to suggest that while we can say of some subjects “it is no laughing matter”, religion is not one of them . It is a pity that some people still do not get the joke. When they do, they will wonder, like me, how they could have been blind for so long.
RIDENDA RELIGIO
Blind Faith: Blind Folly 
I prefer “Ridenda religio” but I think that it remains still a main problem !!!
What is behind the term “religio” ?
You can say “delenda judaism”, “delenda islamism”, etc … but not “delenda, or ridenda, religio”
In the most general sense, religion deal with metaphysics questions. As we don’t have any answer at this moment (in my opinion), religion will remain an important subject for a long time
So “religio” will not be destroyed and some answers can be funny.
That is why I find a progress in your signature
LikeLike
Thank you, my friend. I must confess I do not quite grasp what you are telling me. You “find progress” in my new mantra, but “it remains a main problem”. We both agree that religion will probably never be destroyed, which is why I changed the mantra. Religion is indeed “funny” in every sense of the word. So why cannot we say “ridenda religio” ? At very least religion deserves to be laughed at, ridiculed. I appreciate your commenting, but would appreciate even more if you clarified exactly what you mean.
Frank
LikeLike
I would not presume to answer for Laroche.
I have thought and said in previous comments that one view of spirituality is that it can be seen as an expression of the search for answers to the vast mystery of the fascinating universe of which we are part.
Religion may be seen by some as an aspect of spirituality. I believe that the codifications which are essential attributes of Religions necessarily lead to the absurdities of Religious beliefs which then quite naturally become fair game for ridicule.
LikeLike
You can answer for me Thom : I guess that you are “fluent English” and I fear that there is less differences between our ideas than between what I think and what I am able to translate in English !
So I shall try to be very simple :
Religion ? a simple question : how was the world created, why …
To speak of that mystery, it can be easy to imagine an architect, a god. We can “speak” to him if it helps us in special circumstances. It’s also a way to represent humanity. But nobody is abble to speak for him. And I find no reason to mock at those who think to that question. That is why I don’t agree completely to “ridenda religio”
What has to be destroyed, what is ridiculous, is some answers to that question
It is especially the case for the main one at this time : the old testament. I never found any piece of “possible reality” in it !
And all the studies, éruditions, … etc around what was “constructed” starting from the old testament is ? counter efficient (contre productif) ; it is as if we continue to imagine things, properties, based on the flatness of earth since we know it is round. Because of the détails they discuss of, people forget that it’s wrong from the beginnig
So I shall appreciate a mantra as “delenda old testament” …
LikeLike
Several points, Laroche. I agree that there is probably not a great difference in our respective positions.
The search for answers and meaning is fundamental to the human condition. Religion is in my opinion a corruption of this process. Why imagine an architect? And there are in fact too many “speaking for” this imagined architect and arguably talking nonsense.
The Old Testament is a convenient place to start – given it’s historical place in the development of the three great monotheistic religions. It stands to reason that if you reduce it to fable you destroy the foundations of the others as well.
It should also be borne in mind that in ridiculing religion one is not ridiculing those who hold religious beliefs. One can respect believers whilst marvelling at their incredulity and also ridiculing the beliefs themselves.
LikeLike
3 points :
“architect” ? I used this word only to use something else than ‘god’, in reference to the compexity of the “construction” of our world. It’s enough for me not to spend too much time on a mistery that I shall certainly not be able to solve. And I must confess that I “think” sometimes that thanks to “him”, I shall met loved person after my life, and lot of other pleasant things …
“The Old Testament is a convenient place to start ” : it’s the ONLY place to start, certainly not such or such “detail” of “secondary form” like Christianity and islamism
Ridiculous : I didn’t use this term in a pejorative manner. It was just to refer to the “ridenda religio” of Franck. Of course, there are good persons (most of them) among those who wear beard, kippas, etc …
LikeLike
Unlike you Laroche I don’t expect to play happy families with my happy family after we have all gone the way of all flesh. Sufficient that we enjoy each other here and now.
And I have to confess that in my 2nd last line I displayed my fallibility – incredible really! I feel sure you picked it up as did Frank. My last sentence in my last post should have read “One can respect believers whilst marvelling at their credulity and also ridiculing the beliefs themselves.” Unlike the Popes it seems I am not infallible despite the fact that i was sitting in my special chair..
LikeLike