Wednesday, December 06, 2006
“this overrated medieval entity”
At the OpenDemocracy site, Fred Halliday argues that the recent visit to Turkey by Pope Benedict XVI “was as redolent with dangerous (if unstated) meaning as it was overblown in media coverage.” In a provocative and wide-ranging argument Halliday places the contentious speech to the Representatives of Science in September in the context of Benedict’s long-running “campaign against the evils of secularism and Enlightenment.” and goes on to round the article off with a hard-hitting criticism of “the acceptance and use by the world as a whole of another extraordinary imposture” before calling for an end to the Vatican’s influence in global politics.
Halliday begins his article with a criticism of the management of a complacent media
The concealment starts with media management. Against expectations, there were no massive demonstrations against the visit, far less an attempted assassination: instead, the 12 million people of Istanbul, who evinced little or no interest in the pope, were forced by their compliant state to walk hours to their places of work, while the world was treated by a complacent media to the message of peace and understanding supposedly promoted by his presence on their soil. That the Vatican refused any requests for interviews with the pope by Turkish papers indicates where its priorities lay.
And he identifies and criticises a much wider political project behind the visit, all but obscured by the mananged media message
The flexibility of principle is notable, and much of the outside world has failed to register it. The pope’s real interest is not reconciliation with the Muslim world but the reinvigorated unity of Christians and the long-declared war against secularism and the legacy of the Enlightenment. At the same time he wants to recruit official Islam, be it senior clerics or moderate Islamist leaderships like the current Turkish government, in his campaign against the evils of secularism and Enlightenment.
Such tactical concerns underpin the choice of source in the notorious Regensburg speech, which quoted the Byzantine ruler Manuel II Palaeologus (1350-1425) denouncing Mohammed as bringing to the world only “the evil and the inhuman”. A similar citation could easily have been drawn from a Christian writer of the period: Francis of Assisi, Nicolas de Cusa or the Catalan scholar of Islam, Raimon Llull. What is significant is the political nature of the choice: a crude appeal to the hurt memory of Orthodox Christians about the late days of their empire, before the Ottoman Turks overran Constantinople in 1453.
But the ideological twists and turns involved in the papal visit to Turkey are less important than the Vatican’s wider political project. Few, after all, ask: on what democratically or legally constituted authority do such potentates traverse the world at great public expense and inconvenience, to hold forth on matters of contemporary international politics? After all, the many issues in play these days between the Muslim world and the west - from oil prices to migration, from Iraq to Palestine - are not matters of theology, of faith, of the divine but of politics. Clerical figures have no more qualification to sermonise on these issues than politicians would to rule on the oneness of God, or where to hold hands in prayer.
The claim by clergy on politics, in short, is a fraud. What Joseph Ratzinger is engaged in, abetted by the complicity of those promoting a United Nations-sponsored “dialogue of civilisations”, is a form of ideological land-grab. Nowhere is this clearer than in relations between Europe and the middle east.
In the final section he focuses again on that fraudulent claim and challenges the Vatican’s influence itself
In recent years, under Ratzinger, and for years under his predecessor Karol Wojtyla, this overrated medieval entity has been allowed to play a role in formulating UN policy on matters of major import, notably birth control and use of condoms; it has also, in league with a peculiar and sexually repressive coalition of states (including the United States, Iran, Saudi Arabia and Qatar) promoted policies that, if carried through, will lead to the unnecessary deaths of millions of people. For those looking for such an entity, this is indeed an “axis of evil”.
The only solution to the pernicious and devious antics of Benedict XVI, his acolytes and allies, is to do even more than to challenge the claim of clergy and their leaders to take up political and social positions - it is to place in question the very legitimacy of the Vatican itself. The time has long past when this carbuncle had any right to be treated as a state and given the protection, for its diplomatic, ideological and money-laundering activities that it still enjoys. It would indeed be an excellent goal for reformers of global governance, and for proponents of global civil society, to set the eradication of the Vatican as one of their goals for their years to come.
If this cannot be done by international agreement between states, then other means of attaining this most desirable goal may be considered. The time may come when a mass mobilisation of secular and anti-clerical forces, drawn from across the world, is brought to Rome and simply occupies this anachronistic and pernicious entity; and in doing so abolishes the political and diplomatic authority of popes and cardinals, and turns the Vatican, its wealth and buildings, over to an international, secular, distributive society. It might be a change from demonstrating against the World Trade Organisation, and would target an organisation that has done far more harm on the global stage.
What’s perhaps most fascinating, to me at any rate, is a familiar theme, invoked back on 5th April 2005 by Fintan O’Toole, of the legacy of the long-dead Emperor Constantine
Then, though, Fintan O’Toole asked the question of the church
The question now is whether the church can finally ditch Constantine and get back to Christ. Can it lay the ghost of the Roman imperium and become something other than a male gerontocracy?
Or will the next Pope continue to sit enthroned, with a beautiful crown and gorgeous robes, on the grave of a dead empire?
Interestingly that legacy marks the opening lines of this BBC report
Ceremonial soldiers in white helmets marched into place beside a red carpet at Ankara airport as Pope Benedict’s plane arrived from Rome.
But what Fintan O’Toole didn’t know then, and no-one could have known for certain, when he stated..
The great resonance of John Paul’s death beyond the Catholic world is precisely because it brings a historical era to a close.
He is the last global figure to be shaped by that awful time when much of Europe responded to the loss of familiar empires by attempting to construct new ones, viler and more savage.
..was that the successor to John Paul, the former Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, would have been shaped during that very same awful time.
Pete Baker @ 07:44 PM
Something to chew on, for those of us who have grown beyond undergrad posturing and pseudo enlightened ranting against relgious faith:
Religion, Ireland: in mutation, by Prof. Joseph O’Leary:
{Also worth checking out is Belfast author Peter Rollins’ book “How [not] to talk of God"}
http://josephsoleary.typepad.com/my_weblog/2006/12/religion_irelan.html
Excerpts:
“...The religious culture of Ireland is one that has suffered greatly from fixities of identity, fixities which because they are false, and in conflict with the texture of reality, have produced a constant practice of self-deception and obscurantism. Rigid doctrinal and ethical views, denominational and national chauvinisms, constricting definitions of social role and individual identity, reductive characterizations of alien groups and minorities…
...The major pastoral problem of the Irish Catholic Church is that very many people, including clergy, no longer know why they continue to be Catholics. The meaning of the Gospel has become veiled, or even when that is not the case, the link between the Gospel and the activities of the Church remains disquietingly obscure..
...It is very difficult to undertake a serious quest for religious truth – which must also be a quest for human truth – in a culture where every religious possibility has been mapped out in advance in a conventional frame of reference. Those who find the parish churches deadening often have nowhere to turn. Hence the need of alternative movements running across denominational lines and remaining free of church control. Such movements should breathe the spirit of play and celebration, a mood which more than any other can solicit (cause to tremble) the heavy, dull routine of the institution…
...If the Irish Catholic Church could become a place of free exchange and communication, untold spiritual energies would be released. Free speech is the foremost clue to the solution of the malaise. The obstacles to it include the sense of inferiority induced in most Irish Catholics by the teaching of their Church, and by the powerlessness and passivity to which its structures condemn the laity and the lower clergy; the cowardice and prudent trimming which are part and parcel of clerical culture; the lack of a secure perspective and an articulate theological language in which to identify the problems – because of this lack people fear to open their mouths lest they reveal their own confusion, making fools of themselves, and disturbing the faithful. The attack on the media conducted by conservative Irish Catholics often springs from a fear of free discussion. A phobic attitude to the media often stems from a fear of being honest, and of having to answer awkward questions…
...The hope of Ireland is the honesty of its disaffected Catholics (or those clever enough to be able to stay on as à la carte Catholics). The straight talk and penetrating analysis that has been pouring from their lips in recent years has greatly helped to clarify our religious situation. What needs to be urged, however, is that this critical movement need not consider itself to be cut off from the heritage of Gospel faith. It should confidently claim the Gospel for itself, even against the Church. If it does so, it may bring about a wider religious and human vision which could once more make our country’s one of the respected voices in the concert of civilization.”
“...Since Ireland felt only faintly the impact of the scientific and philosophical Enlightenment, the defining event of modernity, and since her extraordinary contribution to the modernist revolution in literature – Yeats, Joyce, Beckett – was better understood abroad than at home, the notion of a postmodern Ireland can seem doubly misleading. The undermining and/or transformation of Irish Catholicism has mainly been the effect of the emergence of modern (Enlightenment) awareness in Irish society and in the Catholic Church worldwide since the sixties. If the modernization of Ireland was accompanied by an economic boom, the present suggestions of a postmodern mutation verify Fredric Jameson’s diagnosis of postmodernism as ‘the cultural logic of late capitalism’...”
Joseph S. O’Leary, from Richard Kearney, ed. Across the Frontiers, Dublin, Wolfhound, 1988.
Posted by on Dec 09, 2006 @ 11:40 PMKevin
Despite the earlier attempts to divert the discussion, the topic isn’t actually about whether or not anyone is against religious belief.. that will always be a personal decision, and religion has a long-standing position and, for some, value within society.
The actual topic is the privileged position accorded to the Vatican from the legacy of the long-dead Emperor Constantine - which Henry, correctly, notes is the current status - even if he uses that position to defend the status quo.
However, for some, it’s easier to reduce the topic to a more simplistic, and more readily referenced, argument.
Posted by on Dec 09, 2006 @ 11:57 PMHi Kevin, if protesting against the overweaning political influence of the RC church is “pseudo enlightened ranting” then the excerpts above are nothing more than nonsensical new-age mumbo-jumbo.
Not to mention 180 degrees at odds with the Catholic Church’s official position.
Ratzinger and indeed Wytola before him strongly believe(d) in and enforce an authoritarian church where priests teach the message that the infallible pope and his wise cardinals interpret from the immutable teachings of Jesus and congregations take the message on board.
It is not a free-for-all a la carte service where everyone can pick and mix their own religion and morality as part of their lifestyle choices.Once a Catholic, always a catholic, after all.
Posted by on Dec 10, 2006 @ 10:43 AMShould the Vatican’s observer status at the UN and the diplomatic immunity for its officials be abolished or should other religious sects have a similar status?
Posted by on Dec 10, 2006 @ 11:36 AMFirst of all, the Pope is Christ’s Vicar on earth. As such, he should be listened to, at least. Catholicism is Ireland’s faith and the Constitution should not have been amended to accommodate a pampered minority and others. (George Bush tells us atheists are not patriots and he has a point). Greek Orthodoxism is Greece’s religion and that should not be tempered with either. Fredo Frog Halliday should attack the Muslim faith instead of the Pope so that a fatwa can be issued against him and his croaking. The non Muslim world is too fond of empty shit stirrers.
Posted by on Dec 10, 2006 @ 12:19 PMHere is part of this guy’s bio. Born in Dublin and “educated” in Dundak.
[Play the ball! - edited moderator]
And we are supposed to pay heed to him.
,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,
Fred Halliday is a well-known and authoritative scholar on Middle Eastern affairs and a professor of international relations at the London School of Economics. He appears regularly on the BBC, ABC, al-Jazeera television, CBC and Irish radio, and speaks six languages.The author of a number of books, including The Middle East in International Relations: Power, Politics and Ideology (2005) and most recently 100 Myths about the Middle East (2005), Halliday has a fortnightly column on openDemocracy and has written articles on a broad range of issues.
Born in Dublin, Fred Halliday grew up in Dundalk. He completed his first degree at Queen’s College, Oxford, followed by an MSc at the School of Oriental and African Studies, London. His PhD thesis on South Yemen at the London School of Economics took him 17 years to complete.
Posted by on Dec 10, 2006 @ 12:24 PMPete, still waiting for an answer to Henry and I’s question about what the point of this blog is.
That is, if not just the weekly rant by the usual crew on religion, is there an actual point ?
Are you advocating Britain not recognise the papacy or are you advocating throwing the vatican out of the UN ?
If you aren’t advocating anything, then this obviously is the weekly anti religious blog of yours and “no sense need apply”.
One obvious advantage of the Papacy using it’s neutral state status was in it’s ability to function during the second world war. With the nazi war machine baulking at invading, thus leaving a state “behind Nazi lines” who could co-ordinate the escape of many Jews and enemies of the Nazis.
Not bad for an “overated medieval entity”.
http://www.renewamerica.us/columns/destefano/050410
http://www.catholic.com/library/HOW_Pius_XII_PROTECTED_JEWS.asp
http://www.ad2000.com.au/articles/1999/may1999p6_349.html
http://www.michaeljournal.org/piusXII.htm
Posted by on Dec 10, 2006 @ 03:31 PMKevin, that’s an interesting link. I think many large organisations - government and religions chief among them, are badly in need of finding a way to tap into peoples energy and ideas. You’d think in a time of greater communications this should be easier ? Are we all too self focused or busy perhaps ? I agree the culture of such big organisations is too much of a pyramid shape and is not helping the process.
Posted by on Dec 10, 2006 @ 03:44 PMhttp://martinrothonline.com/MRCC11.htm
http://www.crs.org/our_work/what_we_do/programming_areas/aids/index.cfm
http://www.spiked-online.com/index.php?/site/article/1125/
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/special/aids/3268587.stm
I spend 1/2 the year in the Philippines and there doesn’t seem to be an AIDS problem there.
As a disclaimer I have to say that I don’t agree with the Vatican on condoms, especially in the face of AIDS.
I’m assuming most Catholics, as the links above suggest, are of the same mind.Posted by on Dec 10, 2006 @ 04:10 PMabucs
“Pete, still waiting for an answer to Henry and I’s question about what the point of this blog is.”
As I mentioned in my response to Kevin’s comment
“Despite the earlier attempts to divert the discussion, the topic isn’t actually about whether or not anyone is against religious belief.. that will always be a personal decision, and religion has a long-standing position and, for some, value within society.
The actual topic is the privileged position accorded to the Vatican from the legacy of the long-dead Emperor Constantine..”
That should be clear, despite the desire of some to divert the actual conversion to a different, more general, topic - I’ll also note that Fred Halliday mentions some specific examples in relation to global politics.
More importantly, the point is also to encourage some thought about the actual topic and to allow for debate on it…
Naturally, unless step one takes place, step two falls by the wayside..
Posted by on Dec 10, 2006 @ 10:25 PMIf for nothing else the thread was worthwhile to see a secularist decrying the role of John Paul II in bringing down communism on the basis that he was overstepping the line between Church and State in Poland!
But at least that is consistent with international secularist opinion which is really marxist state worship in mufti.
Local secularist opinion when not quite red is very deep orange.
Posted by on Dec 10, 2006 @ 10:40 PMAt the risk of repeating myself..
“Naturally, unless step one takes place, step two falls by the wayside..”
Posted by on Dec 10, 2006 @ 10:45 PMI wonder how many Catholics or Muslims are really up to speed on the intricacies of their religion. Not many I would guess. And that is why Popes are needed: shepherds to guard their flocks against snake oil sellers. Relgion has many dimensions to it. Why did it take Mr Halliday 17 years to complete his PhD and why is he so fond of TV appearances instead of doing research? Could the 17 years to do a simple thesis be a clue?
Let’s hope Prince Charles becomes a Catholic when he ascends to the throne (the overrated medieval entity of Kingship of Britania and her domains, not the Royal toilet)Posted by on Dec 11, 2006 @ 12:31 AM
