The worst of an extremely bad bunch have won

[fpb]

I have refused to vote in the Italian elections, holding that none of the candidates on offer were worthy of even reluctant consent by a free man. Or by anybody free to choose. To have to choose between supporting Veltroni, Berlusconi or the lesser lists is a choice that demeans a human being, and I will not make it. Until the Italian political

Comments

[fpb]

Nonetheless, the US and Italy are more like each other in this matter than either of them is like, say, Britain. Britons, who have been socialized from the schoolyard if not the cradle to hate and fear "organized religion" - and not to think of it in any serious way, either - are apt to sneer at the spectacle of left-wing politicians such as Obama and Hillary seriously discussing their own religious experience and views with religious leaders. In Britain, an apparently genuine Christian like Blair had to conceal his faith and vote as if it did not exist, in order to make a career; and his chief ally, Brown, the current prime minister, is a sworn enemy of Christianity who has taken to the cause of atheism the grim moral purpose and Manichean Calvinist attitudes of his Presbyterian ancestors. In France, there has been positive scandal in some quarters when Sarkozy, as a presidential candidate, dared to speak positively of the Church... It is not that Europeans have no religion, it is that the have been positively robbed of it by their political elites.

[stigandnasty919]

I'm interested in this comment of yours Fabio. It doesn't refer to a Britain I recognise. I would say that any conditioning that I received as a child in terms of religion was most certainly in favour of the church, and the Christian church at that. And that is certainly the case in my daughter's school today. What exactly are you referring to?

And Tony Blair wasn't very good at hiding his Christianity - everyone seems to have been aware of it. As you say, however, his voting record may not always have reflected his 'Christian principles'. And I have to say that his decision to hold off his conversion to Roman Catholic until after he relinquished power smacks of hypocrisy. It certainly shows which aspect of his life took precedence.

I'd also be interested in seeing some references to Brown's opposition to Christianity, as it wasn't something I was aware off.

As to why many Briton's, myself included, are sometimes amused or cynical (I won't use the word sneer as I don't think it applies in many cases) at American politicians discussing their religious beliefs is that we see it as a political stunt, rather than an honest declaration of faith. That is not the case with all politicians, Mike Huckabee struck me as someone who was genuine - I disagreed with him on most policies but his honesty was refreshing. But I'm afraid I'm not convinced that the faith of people like Obama and Clinton are anything more than political expediency - perhaps political necessity.

[fpb]

I am rather surprised that you should challenge me on this matter. Surely you are aware that your experience is scarcely typical of the British state at large. You were raised, so to speak, in an Indian reservation, where practices and attitudes that had been laughed or legislated out of existence in the mainland were allowed to continue for a number of reasons. (Foremost among which being that both "communities" inflicted on the British government and on each other the same kind of "respect" that extreme Muslims have lately been achieving.) I do not have the time to argue this in more depth, although I realize that sooner or later I will, but let me tell you that once you have seen your English friend look around herself and actually drop her voice, as if imparting a dangerous or shameful secret, before she tells you that, yes, she is a Christian, you would not forget it in a hurry. In Italy and in America, the assumption is that being a Christian (or, as we say, credente, a believer) tends to make you a better person; raises your standards, makes demands from you, makes you more willing to forgive and show love. The former is more the emphasis in the USA, the latter in Italy, but it is basically true of both countries. In Britain, on the other hand, it has ineradicable overtones of either infantility or fanaticism or both. Look at the only enduring BBC TV religious program, Songs of Praise, and tell me whether it does not convey by every one of its presentations the idea that religion is essentially a pleasantly infantile refuge for damaged or simple persons.

[fpb]

As for Brown's hatred of Christianity and especially Catholicism, do you imagine for a minute that the BBC or the other British media (most of which are ideological allies on this matter) are going to advertise it? Any time that a moron like Ed Balls, Brown's glove puppet, attacks Christian or Jewish schools, they hug themselves with glee. And the BBC has been worse than despicable in the small matter of human/animal hybridization - something that ought to give any self-respecting human being nightmares, and that Brown is pushing in the face of inevitable Christian opposition which he is not so stupid as not to have expected. Have a look at these:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/ukcorrespondents/holysmoke/mar08/anticatholicgovernment.htm#comments
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/ukcorrespondents/holysmoke/mar08/mps-accused-hectoring.htm#comments

As for the Tory Blur's comfortable conversion...

[fpb]

...I cannot improve on this: http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/ukcorrespondents/holysmoke/dec07/blair-the-catholic.htm

Re: As for the Tory Blur's comfortable conversion - and your earlier comments.

[stigandnasty919]

And I'm surprised, you are surprised. I think you overstate the "Indian Reservation" thing. I may have been brought up in this strange little corner of the world, but I was allowed to travel out of it and do know a fair few people out there in the wide world. I'd say that my experiences in Scotland and Northern England would be that the relationship with religion is similar to that I experienced in my childhood. That being said, I will accept that the areas I'm talking about are mainly rural, rather than urban and that may be where the difference lies.

Like you, I am saddened that your friend felt she had to be quiet about her faith, but by the same token I would find living in a society where: "the assumption is that being a Christian (or, as we say, credente, a believer) tends to make you a better person; raises your standards, makes demands from you, makes you more willing to forgive and show love" somewhat disturbing.

To my mind mind both are examples of prejudice and the latter view, and some more extreme versions of it, may be the reason why some atheists are so inclined towards apparent hatred of Christians. I have been told, by an American visitor to our shores, that the fact that I was not a Christian meant that I was, by definition, a Satanist. Actually, on further conversation it appeared that I was joined in my supposed faith by all Jews, Catholics, Methodists and Baptists along with those who opposed the death penalty or paid federal taxes, oh and those who were not white. (I would have no argument, by the way, with the statement that being a Christian makes demands from you).

I would suggest that the ideal society was one where we could respect all views and judge the worth of people by their actions. That may be an impossible dream in a world where such extreme world views exist but one worth aiming at.

I'm not yet convinced by the articles your linked to that Brown is anti-Catholic. He may have views which are at odds with the views of the Catholic Church, but that is a very different thing. You'll be aware that I share some of his views, or at least struggle with contradictory feeling over issues like faith schools, but I do not regard myself as anti-Catholic.

Indeed I found one of the articles quite offensive in that it made insinuations that Brown's views came from his background and there was 'a faint echo of a Glasgow Rangers chant'. I have always hated that type of argument, if the writer thought Brown was a Protestant bigot from Scotland, why not simply say it rather than making stupid insinuations, which he would doubtless back down from if challanged.

Personally I don't believe that Brown holds the opinions he does because they are in opposition to the Catholic Church and thus is not anti-catholic. I do however stand to be convinced.....

I think our view of Blair is very similar. I have great respect for people who have a faith and live by that faith- so long as it does not involve harming other people. I have little respect for those who claim a faith and act in opposition to it for their own earthly purposes. And i'm afraid there are few politicians who fall into that category.

Re: As for the Tory Blur's comfortable conversion - and your earlier comments.

[fpb]

While regrettable, your experience of some idiot fanatic doesn't count. As well make Jack T.Chick the standard for American Protestantism. (And some Europeans do. Incredibly, I could introduce you to a lecturer in North Irish studies from the University of Tubingen who has described the Methodist George W.Bush as a "fundamentalist" - God help us all.) My point is that if I were to declare myself a credente in my native country, my embarrassment would be that I do not come up to the level that we all, including the opponents of the Catholic Church, expect of credenti. But even my opponents would not instinctively regard me as infantile, ignorant, or backward, and they would not be surprised - as a good friend of mine from Canada was - that I do not believe in the six-day creation. And I still think that you do not realize the depth of ignorance, prejudice and contempt that is routinely bred into English minds by the school system, the BBC, and the newspapers. You believe that the local survivals you encounter are typical. I am certain that they are not. The only lively Christian communities in Britain are immigrant, and that is reflected in the swiftly growing number of Anglican ecclesiastics of immigrant background - reaching, by now, as far up as the Archbishop of York. It is becoming impossible to find native Englishmen who go to church on Sunday, even in the villages that have always been supposed to be the heartland of English Anglicanism.

AS for the Government's attitude to the Church and to Christianity in general - since you insist -
http://www.spectator.co.uk/melaniephillips/590381/witchfinder-balls.thtml
http://closedcafeteria.blogspot.com/search?q=Homosexual+activists+want+Catholic+schools+closed

and so on. This kind of hate speech from government has become quite common, and the only consolation is that as they are as incompetent and gutless as they are loud-mouthed, it will be a long time before their chatter can be taken seriously.

Re: As for the Tory Blur's comfortable conversion - and your earlier comments.

[stigandnasty919]

I think you misunderstand my mentioning of the idiot fanatic. I did not mean to imply that he was typical of Christians, but that is not to say that the experience does not count. Jack T Chick may not be typical, no I'll rephrase that to avoid confusion, is not typical of American Protestantism, but for many people he is the experience they have of it. This may explain, if not

I won't comment further on the prejudice against Christians, except to say that I consider it to be wrong and admit that my experience is limited to 'the Celtic Fringes' and some parts of north East England. But our experience is different and I'm not going to deny the veracity of your experience.

Re: As for the Tory Blur's comfortable conversion - and your earlier comments.

[fpb]

I think we will still disagree on many matters, but may I say it is a pleasure to debate things with someone as calm under fire and as courteous as you.

Re: As for the Tory Blur's comfortable conversion - and your earlier comments.

[stigandnasty919]

Likewise Fabio. I'll just apologise for the little cut and paste error in my last post. The sentence:

Jack T Chick may not be typical, no I'll rephrase that to avoid confusion, is not typical of American Protestantism, but for many people he is the experience they have of it. This may explain, if not...

should have ended 'condone, the vehemence of some idiot fanatics on the atheist side of the debate.

I was sunmoned to assist in the cleaning of a turtle tank and watch an episode of 4400 with my daughter, (an offer I could not refuse), and screwed up the pasteing.

Re: As for the Tory Blur's comfortable conversion - and your earlier comments.

[fpb]

Sounds like you've got your priorities straight.

[fpb]

As for Brown's Presbyterian roots, you cannot first underline the places that an atheist might be coming from, and then deny that it is relevant in a person who has always made a great song and dance of being a son of the manse, even as he pushed policies that would have made his Protestant ancestors retch. Hatred of the Catholic Church is one thing that survives nearly any collapse of faith; that was, if you remember, the beginning of this whole discussion - my contention that, because of their backgrounds, it was impossible for two people like Benito Mussolini and Jack Lewis to convert to Catholicism. Bear in mind that they had nothing else in common, and that while Mussolini probably never heard of Lewis, Lewis had a wholesome contempt for Mussolini from very early on.

[stigandnasty919]

I read this last night and thought about it quite a lot before posting this reply. (Couldn't concentrate on my reading last night - Vol 1 of the Cap Marvel Masterworks.)

I don't believe there is a contradiction in what I have said. In the former case I am trying to explain why the background and experience of a person may explain where opinions they have expressed come from. In the latter I am objecting to the assumption that knowing someones background entitles anyone to assume that they know what that persons views or motivations are. Two very different things.

In the specific case of Brown, you have shown that he promotes policies that are in direct conflict with the views of the Catholic Church what I am not convinced off is that his motivation is an anti-catholic bias or worse.

The best candidate for an accusation of anti-catholic prejudice is in a policy area which directly impacts the church, that of Faith Schools, but I would contend that it is quite possible to hold Brown's position without any anti-catholic motive. You are aware that I, reluctantly, agree with his position on this, for reasons of social cohesion and a view that education is the province and responsibility of the state, and that religious education is the province of the Churches. I don't regard this as an anti-catholic view.

And finally, just to be clear, my annoyance at Damian Thompson's article is that he does not have the courage to state a view and say that he believes Brown to be a bigoted prod, rather he goes into the mealy-mouthed 'some say' and 'it could be thought' mode that I find cowardly and pathetic. I was particularly irritated by the line "they detect a faint echo of a Glasgow Rangers chant" which manages to combine a prejudice that all Glasgow Rangers fans are bigots with an implication of Brown's bigotry that he does not have the courage to come right out and say.

That is why your statement on Brown is not one I find offensive, or irritating because you are prepared to give reasons for and defend your views.

Finally, I think you have upped the ante regarding Lewis in this post, do you believe that his failure to convert to the Catholic Church is the result of 'hatred' of the Catholic Church? Other motives strike me as equally possible. The story of his conversion, almost by personal experience, is very 'protestant' in tone.

Also he was married to a divorcee, and the view of the Catholic Church to Divorce may have had an influence on his decision not to move from the Church of his childhood. As a final point, I think the fact that he sent draft copies of his book 'Mere Christianity' to clergy from all of the main churches, including a Catholic, to be sure that there was nothing in it that any of them could disagree with demonstrates, at the very least, a respect for the Catholic Church.

He may well have regarded High-Church COE as being the Church best able to accommodate his mixture of beliefs.

[fpb]

I doubt that Lewis could ever feel hatred for the Catholic Church after his adult experiences, although he makes it clear that he was taught it as a child - and that in an otherwise civilized household. I think, however, that there was an instinctive distaste such as most people will feel in the presence of, say, homosexuality; however much you respect individuals and admire the likes of Virgil and Plato, nonetheless an outright invitation to practice homosexuality would meet, even before any rational response, with an outright *yuk* reaction. I think that describes Lewis' reaction to the Church.

Lewis' marriage

[fpb]

Lewis did not agree to marry Joy Davidman until he had found out that her previous husband - or, to put it as he would have, "husband" - was himself a divorcee with a wife still living. In other words, his approac to marriage was fully Catholic. Joy Davidman would have obtained an annulment in five minutes flat from any diocesan court.

Re: Lewis' marriage

[stigandnasty919]

Yes, you are quite right, I had forgotten that.