Dawkins Vs the Pope... Or Not

It's been rocky times for the Catholic church these past few years. Pope Benedict XVI seems to have this ability to alienate his church from the rest of the wider world. He upset the Muslim world by requoting 14th century Christian leader Manuel Paleologus, who vented his spleen about Islamic wrongdoing, presumably after having a bad day in the office when the people he was sounding off against took Constantinople. He upset the Jewish community by lifting the excommunication writ on a bishop who was a vocal holocaust denier. He upset the Anglican church by starting an initiative to get the more "harder" proponents to jump ship to Rome, thus robbing the C of E of its finest tombola operators. (I doubt jumble sales in this country can ever be revived after this.) He caused upset in South America by saying that the native inhabitants had been silently really happy to have discovered Christs light when the Europeans showed up. How they felt about all the other "benefits" I think we can guess. Yes if you aren't a Roman Catholic and follow the teachings of a deity or religious belief, chances are Joseph Ratzinger has pissed you off with a Papal pop at your religion. And if you aren't religious (and if you are too), then the awful scale of the child abuse cover ups that have come to light in the Vatican, should engender similar feelings about how his church can act.

In an attempt to try and mend a few fences, the Vatican has decided to revive the "Courtyard of the Gentiles.", which isn't a bad 19th century novel; but a foundation set up by the current Popes more liberal predecessor (Benedict is apparently personally not to hot about it.) to improve relations with other faiths, and even with atheists / agnostics / light deists -through debates and dialogues throughout the year. I can see why the Vatican may have persuaded his popeness to do this sort of thing, even if he has reservations. They have been badly (and rightly so) battered by the child abuse cover ups, and some form of damage limitation is needed [from their perspective]. In an ideal world, it would also be a brave move in the current climate as well. The so - called "4 horsemen" of the vocal atheists; Sam Harris, Dan Dennet, and the Lennon and McCartney of the "new atheist movement; Christopher Hitchens and Richard Dawkins, have been capitalising on the scandals that have engulfed the church of Rome. Their criticisms becoming more vocal, and in my own personal opinion; more justified and relevant as well. This would be an ideal time for the Vatican to address them. So that is why they err....., not to put a finer point on it. Aren't. I quote:

" The foundation, he [President of the Popes council for culture] said, would only be interested in "noble atheism or agnosticism, not the polemical kind – so not those atheists such as [Piergiorgio] Odifreddi in Italy, [Michel] Onfray in France, [Christopher] Hitchens and [Richard] Dawkins".

Such atheists, he added, only view the truth with "irony and sarcasm" and tend to "read religious texts like fundamentalists".

Hmmmmm.

Call me cynical, but "noble atheist" sounds like code for "atheist who doesn't ask awkward questions." What the horsemen may call the "believer in belief". The atheist who doesn't believe themselves, but is not anti-theistic to any degree. Yes I don't have a problem with them being debated with, but if you are serious about dialogue, you have to debate with anti theists as well. Debate on your own terms isn't debate at all.

As for the reading of religious texts? Are they just symbolic metaphor or analogy, or the fundamental;- revealed word of God? Or whatever suits at a given time?

It is hard to find an example of such blatant evasiveness of public discourse as this. This kind of own goal in a damage limitation exercise for Gawds sake! It shows how much of a bubble the Vatican seems to live in. The new atheist movement will have an utter field day with this. Will the Vatican bite the bullet and take on the challenge? Watch this space!