, , , , ,

Democritus, Lucretius and Darwin were right in what they all wrote about “chance and necessity”, and in denying any intentionality or purpose in creation.  To say that a supposed Intelligent First Cause created the world is a highly improbable claim.  To suggest that on the basis of this unlikely, incredible hypothesis one can deduce, in six easy steps, that Mary was physically assumed into Heaven is not only to abuse logic but to expose such credulity to ridicule.  On the other hand, even Dawkins recognises the astronomical odds against the improbable spontaneous coming into being of our Universe and ourselves.  Both the theist and atheist affirmations are, in differing degrees, pretty hard to swallow.  But the evidence strongly favors Dawkins and atheists like myself.  There is not and never was a Divine Watchmaker, blind or otherwise.

On a more down-to-earth level, my own life has been full of the unexpected, unforeseeable and improbable.  Chance – literally – would have it that I was born in the Lucky Country, and, as it happens, of Catholic parents.  Given the context which I detail in my book, “From Illusions to Illumination”, it was hardly unexpected, unforeseeable or improbable that I should have become a Franciscan Roman Catholic priest, a bit surprising perhaps that I was chosen to do doctoral studies in Godology, not exceptional – it was the revolutionary year of 1968 – that I asked to be dispensed from my religious and priestly vows to get married, a little more surprising that I taught Godology for a full decade before, improbably, becoming an atheist.  My subsequent professional career I sometimes find hard to believe myself.

It is fun to establish a list of personal improbabilities, but its interest is more than limited for the people one reader calls the “invisible readers” of this blog.  It is true that only a few of my readers post comments, but the official statistics show that no less than 25 readers have explicitly requested to be “Followers” and to receive so as to read every addition to the blog.  It is also true that even its first version (canalblog) had anonymous readers from at least a dozen different countries, and that I know the names of an admittedly small number of people who are regular but “invisible” readers.  No one knows how many others out there read but never comment.  It would in fact be unlikely, improbable, that among the countless blogs present on the Net, mine should attract legions of readers (wait and see, say I …).

Jesus apparently wrote nothing, except perhaps a few Pharisees’ names in the sand.  My words in the blog will not blow away.  What I have written, I have written, and, however improbably, may be read, by invisible readers, even when I am no longer around to add posts like this one.

                                           RIDENDA   RELIGIO