Sim-O

I’ve just read an article on CiF Belief about exorcism. It was ok. The author talks to an exorcist about this and that and then moves on to the process. Not in too much detail…

Exorcism begins with discernment – determining whether the person is possessed, or just thinks they are (or someone else just thinks they are). “We don’t do them on demand,” says Thomas. I was interested by the possibility of people being brought in by others. “The person who is possessed may not even realise it. It’s more frequent that someone would bring a person in,” Paprocki said. (This is my fear. What if my mother decides I’m possessed? My neighbour? My editor?)

It then moves on to the discernment…

A team does discernment. “I have a physician, a clinical psychologist, and a psychiatrist, all of whom are practicing Catholics,” says Thomas. “Out of a hundred I exorcise five.” He says the exorcist is the ultimate skeptic. “I never assume when someone says ‘I need an exorcism’ that they do.”

WTF? The exorcist is the ultimate skeptic? Not the psychiatrist or the physician (who I’m presuming will be a doctor) but the guy that drives demons out of people is the hardest to convince.

How would a physician know if someones possessed? Take blood sample and look for little gremlins? Where the fuck do they get a psychiatrist that believes that something takes over someones mind, rather than suppressed memories or trauma is screwing with someones head?

Religious people. They fucking amaze me sometimes.

BBC…

A senior Papal adviser has pulled out of the Pope’s UK visit after saying arriving at Heathrow airport was like landing in a “Third World” country.

Cardinal Walter Kasper reportedly told a German magazine the UK was marked by “a new and aggressive atheism”.

Oh, cheers. Thanks for that.

Isn’t that a bit of a contradiction? Being here in the UK is like being in a third world country and yet we are in the grip of Teh Eeeeviiiil Godless Ones? The impression I got, and as you know I’m not really one for sniffing out stats, so correct me (with links) if I’m wrong, was that third world countries were quite religious.

The Vatican said the cardinal had not intended “any kind of slight” and had simply pulled out due to illness.

So it was a fucking compliment, then? In what way, ever, has being like a third world country not been a compliment? You can’t even think of one way can you?

He also criticised British Airways (BA), saying that when you wear a cross on the airline “you are discriminated against”.

Hahahahahahahahahahahaha! What a fucking old cunt. Has he travelled with BA? He probably has. Did he get discriminated against? I’d bet my right testicle he didn’t. Has any one who’s travelled by BA whilst wearing a cross been refused service or stopped from using the toilet or been denied anything at all? Get to fuck have they.

If this deluded dipshit is referring to that woman that wanted to wear a cross but was told not to because it was against BAs’ uniform policy. Well, it’s not like wearing a cross is one of the central tenets of christianity like say, a Sikhs’ turban.

Vatican sources said Cardinal Kasper [for it is he…] – who stepped down in July as the head of the department that deals with other Christian denominations – was suffering from gout and had been advised by his doctors not to travel to the UK.

That’s fucking handy, isn’t it? The cardinal calls the country he about to visit a bunch of cunts and suddenly he’s had an attack of gout and can’t go. Obviously I don’t know if the cardinal really has gout, or has been advised by his doctor not to travel, but what is it from Rome to London? 3 hours? 4? Hardly a long haul flight.

A bit of a coincidence, wouldn’t you say?

Via Jesus & Mo I happen across this…

HAWKING POSITS FALSE CONFLICT
June 8, 2010

In an interview last night with ABC-News reporter Diane Sawyer, scientist Stephen Hawking opined that human life is “insignificant in the universe,” and then went on to say that “There is a fundamental difference between religion, which is based on authority, [and] science, which is based on observation and reason.” He concluded by saying, “Science will win because it works.”

Stephen Hawking does have a point. Bill Donohue, the President of the Catholic League disagrees (I’ve no idea who he is either, but he reckons the Catholic priest abuse scandal is about teh gays not peadophiles).

What Big Bill says is…

How any rational person could belittle the pivotal role that human life plays in the universe is a wonder, but it is just as silly to say that all religions are marked by the absence of reason. While there are some religions which are devoid of reason, there are others, such as Roman Catholicism, which have long assigned it a special place.

How can rational person overstate how little a role humans play in the universe? How can anybody think we have a ‘pivotal’ role in what happens outside of our planets atmosphere? We might be able to warm Earth up a degree or two or be really good at making various forms of life here extinct, but anything on a bigger scale is waaaaay beyond us.

Some religions may be more receptive to reasoned argument, but Catholicism is not one of them. Look at it’s stance on condoms, for Christs sake.

Religions may accept certain bits of science and reason, but as soon as a bit contradicts what is in it’s special writings then it doesn’t want to know. Unless of course it can come up with a bit of holy logical acrobatics to say it’s teachings were wrong without saying they were wrong.

It was the Catholic Church that created the first universities, and it was the Catholic Church that played a central role in the Scientific Revolution; these two historical contributions made possible Mr. Hawking’s career.

Just because somebody is teaching something doesn’t mean what they’re teaching is correct.

Reason, in pursuit of truth, has been reiterated by the Church fathers for nearly two millennia. That is why Hawking posits a false conflict: in the annals of the Catholic Church, there is no inherent conflict between science and religion. Quite the contrary: science and religion, in Catholic thought, are complementary properties. Ergo, nothing is gained by alleging a “victory” of science over religion.

No conflict between science and religion? Why did the Catholic church persecute Galileo for saying the earth orbited the Sun instead of saying ‘really? Could you look into it further?’

There is an inherent conflict twix science and religion: religion is based on what old teachings tell us what to believe, science tells us what we find out from evidence.

Religion without reason, Pope Benedict XVI instructed us in his Regensburg address in 2006, leads to fanaticism. That much Hawking seems to understand. What he doesn’t get is its contra: science without faith also leads to disaster—the genocidal regimes in Germany, the Soviet Union, China and Cambodia being Exhibits A, B, C and D.

Pope Beni got something right, but the examples given of science without faith are not cause and effect. Throughout history there are appalling examples of religious and non-religious people in power causing atrocities. Being ‘of faith’ or not does not mean one is A Good Guy or A Bad Guy.

Religion will never get to the truth. There are too many reasons not to. Science is about discovery. It doesn’t matter what that discovery is.

The pope has written a letter in response to all this business about child abuse by Irish Catholic churchmen.

It starts off by waffling on about how Irish Catholics have had a hard time over the centuries but there have been some outstanding chaps in that period too.

He continuous with bits aimed at the people who were abused themselves, their parents, bishops, Catholics in general and the vicars, or whatever they’re called, who did the abusing. All pretty obvious stuff with suitable a apology/condemnation/words of support in the right places.

Then, Gods elected right hand man says…

I now wish to propose to you some concrete initiatives to address the situation.

So what does he suggest? Shopping his pervy colleagues? Changes in the procedures to be followed when a priest is accused of or found to be fucking with the kids in their care?

At the conclusion of my meeting with the Irish bishops, I asked that Lent this year be set aside as a time to pray for an outpouring of God’s mercy and the Holy Spirit’s gifts of holiness and strength upon the Church in your country. I now invite all of you to devote your Friday penances, for a period of one year, between now and Easter 2011, to this intention. I ask you to offer up your fasting, your prayer, your reading of Scripture and your works of mercy in order to obtain the grace of healing and renewal for the Church in Ireland. I encourage you to discover anew the sacrament of Reconciliation and to avail yourselves more frequently of the transforming power of its grace.

Particular attention should also be given to Eucharistic adoration, and in every diocese there should be churches or chapels specifically devoted to this purpose. I ask parishes, seminaries, religious houses and monasteries to organize periods of Eucharistic adoration, so that all have an opportunity to take part. Through intense prayer before the real presence of the Lord, you can make reparation for the sins of abuse that have done so much harm, at the same time imploring the grace of renewed strength and a deeper sense of mission on the part of all bishops, priests, religious and lay faithful.

I am confident that this programme will lead to a rebirth of the Church in Ireland in the fullness of God’s own truth, for it is the truth that sets us free (cf. Jn 8:32).

No. More fucking prayer. More places and opportunities for prayer and worship. Whoopie-fucking-do. More of the same.

Oh, and more talking…

I also propose that a nationwide Mission be held for all bishops, priests and religious. It is my hope that, by drawing on the expertise of experienced preachers and retreat-givers from Ireland and from elsewhere, and by exploring anew the conciliar documents, the liturgical rites of ordination and profession, and recent pontifical teaching, you will come to a more profound appreciation of your respective vocations, so as to rediscover the roots of your faith in Jesus Christ and to drink deeply from the springs of living water that he offers you through his Church.

That’ll do the fucking job, won’t it? Give your priests a “more profound appreciation of [their] respective vocations” because that is exactly what the cunts that abused, not only, their position in the Catholic church was missing. If only those priests truly knew what sort responsibility they held and where it came from then they wouldn’t have fucked up so many lives.

After the pope has attacked the Equality Bill ahead of his coming visit there then comes this…

Harriet Harman has backed away from a confrontation with religious leaders over who they can employ, making clear that she will not force contentious amendments to the Equality Bill through Parliament.

Those contentious issues are the re-wording, an amendment, of the Equality Bill to make it clear that exemptions from the bill applied only to religious posts within an organisation. Which is fair enough. It would be like appointing an interpreter that couldn’t speak the lingo.

But this exemption is not enough for the God Squad.

What gives them the right to discriminate? What is the difference between discriminating on the grounds of religious belief and discriminating against someone on racial grounds?

Nothing at all. They’re both beliefs, both are grounded in fantasy. It’s just that one is more acceptable than the other… apparently.

h/t chrisplol

The Guardian…

Reiki, an alternative Japanese therapy with a growing band of followers in the west, is “unscientific” and “inappropriate” for use in Catholic institutions, according to America’s bishops.

Guidelines issued by the committee on doctrine at the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops warn healthcare workers and chaplains that the therapy “lacks scientific credibility” and could expose people to “malevolent forces”.

The document also claims that for a Catholic to believe in reiki presents “insurmountable problems”.

Bwahahahahaha! An organisation that is built on the myth and legend with no scientific evidence, is scared that some of its’ members might fall for a different set myths and legends that have no scientific evidence.

Ooh, molevolent forces…

…a notion which is of course hugely credible and strongly supported by scientists, particularly those working in Malevolent Forces and Evil Spirits research departments around the world.

And, again from the New Humanist, in the interest of balance…

New Humanist was unable to find a reiki practitioner to comment on the scientific credibility of the Vatican stance on condoms and the spread of HIV…

Via D-Notice