Love as the "secret" of Catholicism and the dangers of "atheistic secularism"

[briansloan]

Cardinal Murphy-O'Connor writes intelligently in today's Guardian, emphasising that love is the great secret of the Catholic Church. He argues that, contrary to popular belief, it is religion that permits the freedom of the human spirit because it takes us to the core of our relationships and our nature as moral human beings. Conversely,

Comments

[pw201]

I'm not sure I'd count most of the comments as vilification (except perhaps the link to Priest Off!, but then maybe that's fair comment). The comments rightly point out that he's got a cheek talking about HIV in Africa. Many commenters make similar points to yours about his dismissal of secularism. The points about what happens when Catholicism rules (gets the "whip hand", as one commenter put it) are well made, also.

The Cardinal seems confused about secularism. What it means is that religion is not privileged in the public sphere, not that religion is not allowed there. However, all the arguments I've seen from Catholics on the upcoming Bill boil down to "this is wrong because the Church says so". I think it's right to say that there should be no expectation that non-Catholics will respect that sort of argument.

I'm not sure it's the forum that's causing the negative response. Most of the BBC's Have Your Say commenters are dumb as bricks Daily Mail readers, yet you'll find similar sentiments there. I think people don't want clerical interference in the political process. The RCC is punching far above its weight because it has adherents in positions of power, and I doubt I'm the only person who's worried about this. O'Connor's timing is also unfortunate, coming on the heels of the Anglican Archbishop's recent gaffes. I might dare to hope that the public's tolerance for this sort of intervention is decreasing regardless of people's politics.

[briansloan]

1. You're preaching to the converted about Have Your Say!

2. I think it's relatively legitimate for the Cardinal to have his say, since in theory he represents around 5 million UK citizens. As someone who doesn't necessarily believe that Church doctrine should be simply transcribed into law, I think I'm in the minority. You might say that the reason people hold certain beliefs is unfortunate from an atheist and secular point of view, but some would argue that this is the point of religion. We do live in a democracy, after all.

3. I have tried to express my arguments in a way that goes beyond "this is wrong because the Church says so", even if they have not stood up quite as well as I hoped.

4. As you'll see from earlier posts, I do not consider Dr Williams' interventions to be "gaffes", and I think the whole business said more about the immaturity of our media-governed society than about the Archbishop.

5. I accept that HIV was perhaps an unfortunate choice of subject-matter given what people perceive to be the Church's contribution to the problem.