Happy National Day Of Prayer!

Sometimes I am just so embarrassed by my country. Do we really need the government telling people to appeal to an invisible magic man in the sky? Apparently, we do.

“I call upon the citizens of our nation to pray, or otherwise give thanks, in accordance with their own faiths and consciences, for our many freedoms and blessings, and I invite all people of faith to join me in asking for God’s continued guidance, grace, and protection as we meet the challenges before us,” Obama said in his official proclamation.

Get stuffed, you pandering, unprincipled hack.

Let’s just hope that the appeal of the rejection of the NDOP goes our way…not that I have high hopes that this Supreme Court will help.

A church is a gaping hole cut into a community’s resources

Chicago has been oppressing the people! They’ve installed some mechanical deviltry called parking meters on the street, forcing people who want to drive their multiton iron chariots (an offense unto god right there) into the city and then park them somewhere to pay for the privilege. Everyone is annoyed by parking meters, but guess who is whining the loudest? The churches, of course.

“I think it’s interfering with my religious activity,” said the Rev. Webb Evans, 96, who keeps an office at Israel Methodist Community Church. “We should have the freedom to go to church without having to pay a meter five or six feet in front of the door.”

Yes? And others should be free to go into a bar without paying a meter. Or into a restaurant. Or into a store. Those at least bring some economic gain into a community. But churches? They already get to squat on valuable property without paying taxes, and now they want the city to subsidize the parking of their flocks? What they’re really complaining about is that the city is fleecing the flock a little bit before the priests can get their hands in their pockets.

And this is hilarious:

“We’re not asking for special privileges,” said the Rev. Philip Blackwell, pastor of First United Methodist Church at Chicago Temple. “We just happen to be religious institutions.”

No, special privileges is precisely what they are asking for: they are insisting that the activity of their precious institution is more valuable or more worthy than that of other businesses and residences in the area, and want a special dispensation so their clientele can use a public resource for free.

I say, charge ’em extra.

I have a special antipathy to this kind of demand from churches. I grew up in a neighborhood where our house was sandwiched between two churches, the Catholic and the Lutheran. We were afflicted constantly by the Lutheran church’s insistence on playing hymns on one of those ghastly electronic carillons every hour and half hour…and since we were right across the street and they played them LOUD, all conversation, music, and TV in our house got regularly drowned out. And then on Sundays, the neighborhood would be choked with cars parked everywhere.

(Which we turned into a bonus, actually: it was amazing how many people would come out of a church service with bills stuffed into their pockets, which would spill unnoticed onto the ground when they pulled out their car keys. We kids would head out right after services to cruise the empty parking spaces, looking for loot.)

Another gripe is that the churches turned our town into a wasteland. Parking was such an issue that they bought up whole blocks, razed everything on them, and paved them over…including my childhood home. If you’re ever in Kent, Washington, go to the corner of 2nd and Titus streets where I lived, and behold what was once a lively neighborhood, now a desert of asphalt — my house was on the northeast corner of what is now the Catholic church’s parking lot. Don’t go on the hour, unless you’re really fond of “Onward Christian Soldiers.”

At last! The Vatican takes action!

Finally, the church is beginning to clean up its act. The Vatican has announced that it is investigating three orders of nuns in Washington state — what perverted and revolting acts have these nuns committed to draw the ire of the Catholic church? I’m sure your imagination is working hard right now.

The Vatican says it’s following up on complaints of feminism and activism.

Oh, my god … heads will roll. They’ll be ostracized, exorcized, and excommunicatized. No mere buggery of children here, but feminism? Jesus is weeping in heaven above, and the angels are grounded with grief.

The Shroud of Turin is clearly fake…so why is the Pope worshipping it?

When an old thread is suddenly resurrected, it’s interesting to try to guess why. Every time Kent Hovind gets a little bit of press, his weird fans start googling his name, and presto, they stumble onto one of my old threads and start waxing indignant. The latest zombie thread is about the Shroud of Turin, and I can guess what has prompted people to start digging on the web for info: that goofy ol’ Pope Ratzi is genuflecting before the Shroud.

He said that keeping up that hope is the message of the Shroud of Turin, in which disciples see their sufferings “mirrored” in the suffering of Christ, CNA reported.

No, no, no. That’s not the message of the Shroud. It’s a much more reassuring one for the papacy: the moral is that even the cheesiest, most absurd con game can be kept going for centuries if it involves religion. That’s the message of hope the Catholic hierarchy can take from a fake relic.

Speaking of hope…look at this other entrepreneurial opportunity: for a mere 57€, there is an organization that will light a candle for you at Lourdes, that other long-running, lucrative fraud.

It’s all my fault

PBS has a crew in the Vatican, looking to see some signs of light from a secretive organization. Here’s an account of one audience — it sounds hopeless. First some flunky came out to make this declaration:

The last couple of months have been very difficult, he went on, with so many questions being raised about things that happened long ago. But he said, “This is the time for truth, transparency and credibility. Secrecy and discretion are not values that are in fashion at the moment. We must be in a condition of having nothing to hide.”

Ah, now it’s all in the distant past. Once again, they are not going to take responsibility, but push it off. That is not promising.

When the Pope himself spoke, it was no better. No mention of the sex abuse scandals, just another slow swivel to another target in the blame game: the internet.

“The times in which we living knows a huge widening of the frontiers of communication,” he said (according to our Italian fixer/producer) and the new media of this new age points to a more “egalitarian and pluralistic” forum. But, he went on to say, it also opens a new hole, the “digital divide” between haves and have-nots. Even more ominous, he said, it exacerbates tensions between nations and within nations themselves. And it increases the “dangers of … intellectual and moral relativism,” which can lead to “multiple forms of degradation and humiliation” of the essence of a person, and to the “pollution of the spirit.” All in all, it seemed a pretty grim view of the wide open communication parameters being demanded by the Internet age.

The rejection of modernity is not just the provenance of yokel creationists, I guess.

Sometimes, it really is hard to tell faith from a mental illness

This is really hard to watch: it’s a young woman giving the benediction at the graduation ceremony at Midwestern State University, in Texas, and she’s so sucked up into her religious fervor that she starts shaking, I catch a hint of speaking in tongues, and finally ends up fainting on the stage.

If it were anything other than religion she was trying to push up there, we’d be getting that poor woman in for psychiatric help.

No sense of humour at all, Part II

I thought the whole Affair of the Mocking Memo was grossly overblown and absurd, but I had no idea how pretentious the Vatican could be. Now, because of an internal memo that made some mild jests about confronting the Pope on his British visit with the consequences of his policies, the silly men in dresses are threatening to stick their noses in the air, sniff, and refuse to come.

One highly-placed source in the Vatican said: “This could have very severe repercussions and is embarrassing for the British government – one has to question whether the action taken is enough.

“It is disgusting. Britain’s ambassador to the Holy See has been in to see the Secretary of State and explain what happened and this will all be relayed to the Pope.

“It’s even possible the trip could be cancelled as this matter is hugely offensive.”

Cardinal Renato Martino, the former head of the Vatican’s Pontifical Council for Justice and Peace, said: “The British government has invited the Pope as its guest and he should be treated with respect.

“To make a mockery of his beliefs and the beliefs of millions of Catholics not just in Britain but across the world is very offensive indeed.”

Oh, “very offensive indeed.” Merely joking about asking the Pope to defend himself outrages the Vatican…but we’re supposed to overlook the effects his lies about birth control, disease, and the treatment of children have had on the world.

Stay home, Ratzi, stay home. Hide in your palace surrounded by your sleazy sycophants, and stuff up your ears when others dare to point out that you are an evil old man running a corrupt establishment.

No sense of humour at all

Some wag in the British government made a half-joking tentative itinerary for the Pope’s visit to England…and it got spread around and made some stuffed shirts very angry.

The Rt Rev Malcolm McMahon, the Roman Catholic Bishop of Nottingham, was astonished and angered by the proposals.

He said: “This is appalling. You don’t invite someone to your country and then disrespect them in this way.

“It’s outlandish and outrageous to assume that any of the ideas are in any way suitable for the Pope.”

i-88319a73204a2a82f70e39e559c6d30e-popehat.jpeg

The fellow who made the list has been chastised and transferred. Representatives of the government have crawled to the Vatican to apologize and beg forgiveness. It must have been a tremendous lampoon; I imagined it would propose all kinds of degrading behaviors, like “flounce around in a dress” (oh, hey, I think he’s going to do that one) or “wear a funny hat” (dang, another gimme) or “drink until swozzled” or maybe even “lose virginity to a mature and consenting woman”. You know, the kind of thing a joker like me might suggest.

But no. Here’s the list of proposals.

  • Launch of ‘Benedict’ condoms
  • Review of Vatican attitude on condom use
  • Bless a civil partnership
  • Reversal of policy on women bishops/ordain woman
  • Open an abortion ward
  • Speech on equality
  • Statemen on views over adoption (change of stance)
  • Training course for all bishops on child abuse allegations
  • Harder line on child abuse—announce sacking of dodgy bishops
  • Vatican sponsorship for network of AIDS clinics
  • Meet young unemployed people
  • Apologize for… …
  • Canonise/pseudo canonise a group
  • Announce whistle blowing system for child abuse cases
  • Go to job centre
  • Debate on abortion
  • All catholic schools should be free entry to all
  • Speech on democracy
  • Vatican and C of E funded committee on dialogue
  • Launch helpline for abused children

Hang on…those aren’t half bad. It’s not even a very funny list. They all propose confronting the Pope with the actual reality of his policies, or with the real problems that people in the country are facing. The list is clearly informed by opposition to the follies of Catholicism, but how should one greet the head of a bizarre but influential cult that continues to promote bad ideas and protect criminals? With simpering deference? Apparently, that’s what the appalled members of the government and various other institutions think. How dare some rascal in the ranks actually propose to make the Pope face facts or defend his policies?

Personally, I’d love to see the Pope in a debate on abortion, where he would actually have to address difficult questions and defend his own ideas. Best idea yet would be a debate on various controversial topics, like birth control, abortion, the role of women in the church, and homosexuality…with the Pope on one side, and Stephen Fry on the other. It could be perfectly respectful, and it would be hilarious.

Alternatively, if we just want to see the Pope flensed and the wounds rubbed with salt and sulfur, they could bring in Christopher Hitchens as the opponent. Either way, you know that the Pope would be demolished by bringing in any confrontation that didn’t simply bow obsequiously to his antique office.