SUBSCRIBER LOGIN

Search
First Things

Loading
« Previous  |Home|  Next »         

Friday, September 17, 2010, 9:00 AM

The Los Angeles Times, not a paper outwardly friendly to the Church, has commented on the pope’s tour through Scotland: “More than 100,000 well-wishers greeted Benedict as he travelled the streets of Edinburgh in his specially designed Popemobile, with his shoulders wrapped in a green Tartan scarf. Scattered protests made hardly a dent in the larger din of cheers and applause.”

Click here for more posts on the Pope's UK visit
Click here for more posts on the Pope's UK visit
What’s this? Large crowds for the papal  visit? Cheers for Benedict? Protests against him fizzling out? That wasn’t supposed to be the secularist narrative, was it?

Over at America magazine’s blog, one poster wonders whether the much-heralded protestors are really paper tigers: “According to the website of the British Humanist Association (BHA), its membership in 2010 is 4,100.” Given its underwhelming numbers, why are any of us fretting over its predictable opposition to the Pope? The group is now upset that Benedict criticized atheism, but “even if the Pope had not made reference to atheism and Nazism,” continued the poster, “the BHA would have found something nasty to say. The crowd of 125,000 in Edinburgh is far more eloquent and significant than the mutterings of the BHA.”

6 Comments

    Ray Ingles
    September 17th, 2010 | 1:06 pm

    Sure, the BHA would have complained about aspects of the Pope’s visit – e.g. that their tax money was being spent on it. But that doesn’t make their complaint about the attempt to tie Naziism to atheism invalid:

    http://scienceblogs.com/dispatches/2010/09/the_popes_extraordinary_chutzp.php

    Mary
    September 17th, 2010 | 9:10 pm

    No, what makes any complaint invalid is that Nazis did indeed want to eradicate God.

    Ray Ingles
    September 17th, 2010 | 10:54 pm

    Mary, your support for that statement is… what? You are aware that Hitler outlawed atheist and “freethought” organizations, right?

    There’s a pretty good case to be made the other way

    Ray Ingles
    September 18th, 2010 | 10:40 am

    Darn it, wrong URL. See here for some illuminating quotes: http://scienceblogs.com/pharyngula/2010/09/list_of_hitler_quotes_in_honor.php

    mike cliffson
    September 18th, 2010 | 6:36 pm

    Dear Ray

    re yr comment 17th
    Doesn’t follow.
    The more totalitarian you are, the less you tolerate far or near.
    Bolchevism and the left SRs
    Stalinism and trots…..

    yes, personally, hitler’s was some weirdo mix of a deity like Thor and come all ye wiccanites

    There’s one round the block from you.But will he get power? If all else is swept away, maybe.

    Check inflence Social darwinism etc on German intellectual /elite climate from mid 19th etc on..

    Ray Ingles
    September 18th, 2010 | 11:24 pm

    “Social Darwinism”? Eh, it was an element, but not important relative to other things, like the anti-Semitism that had been all around Germany for centuries, and Hitler himself was a creationist. He specifically argued that the races had been created separately.

=