A Devilishly Smart Pope

A DEVILISHLY SMART POPE

One of the books I'm reading now is John D. Barrow's 'The Book of Nothing'. The subject is  a look at the concept of 'nothing', the void, emptiness, zero, the vacuum and so on. There's actually quite a bit to say about nothing, and book ranges from a history of the mathematical sign for zero, through the 'philosophic concept' of nothingness, to the idea of the vacuum in physics, its explanation by the 'ether' and the eventual overthrow of that concept. Temperatures (absolute zero) and the place of the vacuum in quantum mechanics, relativity and cosmology come on stage, and the book ends with a return to the philosophic concept itself. Yes, quite complex, and I've barely gotten to chapter 2. Nice to have a roadmap to a blank space. I'll be reviewing the book when done.

But one of the matters that did come up was the story of Pope Sylvester II, one of the few admirable holders of the keys of Peter in the Middle Ages. This is a story appealing enough to shove its way to the front of the 'Molly Line'. Sylvester II was born Gerbert de Aurillac (945 - 1003). He reigned as Pope from 999 to 1003. Yes the Pope in the Chair during the turn of the millennium. The world didn't end, and Gerbert/Sylvester was definitely one of the more capable Popes of the age. A lot of his accomplishments were political and hardly bear mention here. Defending the property of the Church. Playing off one ruler against another though he was usually in alliance with the Holy Roman Emperor of the time.  The politics of Italy at the time were particularly chaotic, and once both he and the Emperor had to flee Rome during one of the revolts. He even tried to reform the Church's organization and reduce abuses such as simony, concubinage and nepotism. This was an Herculean task, and even with the assistance of St. Jude (the patron saint of the impossible) the Church remained just about as corrupt as always. He did, however, succeed in significantly increasing the Church's title holdings. Maybe this goal was in direct contradiction to the idea of making the Church into a more 'Holy' outfit. He also played a major role in the Christianization of Eastern Europe, appointing Metropolitans for both Poland and Hungary, and in the later case naming that country as a 'Kingdom'. Thus the Crown of Hungary became dependent on the Papacy.


His political accomplishments were minor compared to his intellectual contributions to European culture. He had early on spend considerable time as an envoy to the far more civilized Muslim states of southern Spain, and he turned his natural curiosity to good effect there, absorbing much of the culture of Andalucía. When he returned to France he was appointed head of education for the Archdiocese of Rheims, and from there he significantly elevated the clerical level of education throughout the French Kingdom.

 When his patron died he was considered the natural successor, but the Capetan monarchy had other ideas, and a relative of the King was appointed in his stead even though Gerbert was a supporter of Hugh Capet whose reign marked the end of the Carolingian dynasty. Barrow has this matter somewhat confused as he lists this Episcopal position without mentioning that Gerbert's appointment was overthrown. Consistent with the political level of the time the King's appointee was later removed because of suspicion of treason to his sponsor. Gerbert who initially was himself accused of treason to the House of Capet was reappointed, but this was challenged and his appointment declared invalid. When he did finally become Pope he pretty well washed his hands of the matter by declaring his competitor as the legitimate Archbishop. Barrow also confuses another appointment of his, as Archbishop of Ravenna, supposing him to be the 'Abbot' of Ravenna. All this is quite forgivable as the politics of the time, clerical and lay, were by their very nature confusing.

Gerbert was lauded for his scholarly contributions in a number of fields. He became the tutor of both Emperors Otto II and his son Otto III, and, as mentioned above, he was elevated to the Papacy with the support of the latter. Gerbert was a true polymath. He was the accepted authority in the liberal arts in his day and a major influence on theology. He was also something of an engineer, designing a hydraulic organ that didn't require air to continually be pumped in as it played. He is also credited with advances in the art of clock making due to one which he designed for the Cathedral of Magdeburg. Even this is confused. Some sources such as the 'Catholic Encyclopedia' say that he was the inventor of the pendulum clock. Others say that his clock was mechanical but weight driven rather than using a pendulum. Still others say that his clock was actually simply a sundial. It was, however, in the field of science and mathematics that he made his greatest contributions.

Gerbert was credited with a number of innovations. He introduced the abacus to Europe, and also the use of the Arabic/Indian number/decimal system. Both were necessary foundations for the later rise of commercial enterprises in the Renaissance. Hard to do proper accounting with Roman numerals. Not that they were always appreciated. In 1299 the decimal system was outlawed in Florence supposedly because it was more vulnerable to fraud. The worry about this matter delayed the adoption of decimal numbers in northern Europe until the sixteenth century. For Gerbert, however, they were a Godsend, and he was the foremost expert on mathematics, geometry and astronomy of his day. Much of this was based on what he had learned in southern Spain even though he was creative enough in his own right.

He is credited with the reintroduction of the 'armillary sphere' to western Europe. This is a 3D model of the heavens, and fitted with viewing tubes it was an early prototype of the telescope. It should be noted that such a sphere would imply that the Earth itself was a sphere. Not that the idea of a flat Earth was universal in Medieval times, but it was common enough even though the use of spheres such as this proliferated.

Barrow's book corrected a misconception of my own, one that I had held for more than a few years. I knew that Sylvester II was a remarkably educated and knowledgeable man well ahead of his time. I also knew that one of the medieval Popes had been dug up from his grave and the corpse put on trail. I'd always assumed that the uncommunicative defendant was Sylvester. During his lifetime and after his death rumours circulated that he was in league with the Devil, that he had even constructed a bronze head that would answer questions posed to it. Sort of an early robot I guess. I assumed that this was the reason for the exhumation. Wrong I was. The corpse was that of one Pope Formosus, and the charges were much more mundane. After the guilty verdict was pronounced the hapless cadaver was chopped to pieces, burnt and the ashes thrown into the Tiber. That will teach him.

The accusations of witchcraft would certainly be a likely medieval explanation for Sylvester's brilliance, but no - he stayed in the ground. Not that he rested easily though. The legends of his life followed him into the grave, and typically they are also confused. One legend says that when a Pope is due to die that Sylvester's bones rattle in the tomb. Another says that the walls of the crypt weep on the sad occasion. I guess there's no reason they can't both be right.

THE DARK SIDE OF CHRISTIAN HISTORY

The Dark Side of Christian History

The Dark Side of Christian History by Helen Ellerbe: Morningstar and Lark, Orlando Florida, 1999 ISBN 0-9644873-4-9

     This is the sort of book that I had to force myself through. It was not so much the purported subject matter but rather the author's not-so-well-hidden agenda. This is not an overview of the crimes of the Roman Catholic Church and the Protestant churches except insofar as these can be slotted into Ellerbe's real purpose. This purpose is to argue against Christianity and for pop-religious New-Age "spirituality" with a thin veneer of corrupted feminism. The author makes her intentions abundantly plain in the Introduction for fostering "sexism, racism, the intolerance of difference and the 'desecration' of the natural environment". It would be hard to find such a crystal clear expression of trendy leftism outside of the academy. Social class is conspicuous by its absence. So is the concept of hierarchy in general, the role of government and individual freedom (beyond sacred differences deified by a subculture). There is a vague bow to "self-determination" but no indication that this might extend to the infidels outside of the politically-correct charmed circle. It almost certainly doesn't.

     The author genuflects in her introduction to the fact that there were "alternative Christianities" in the early centuries of the Church. As might be expected from the blindfolded world view of the 'New-Age' she lavishes particular praise on the Gnostics. She also mentions the Essenes. As might be expected her knowledge of these theologies is incredibly superficial, probably drawn from other neo-mystic books that bear the same resemblance to reality as Stalinist propaganda does. The Gnostics, in the majority of cases amongst their crazy-quilt writings, were far more "anti-nature" than any orthodox theologian could ever be. Despite the lies of the orthodox their beliefs were quite ascetic, and their "hidden knowledge" consisted of an over-elaborated mythology the knowledge of which was supposedly the key to escaping the inevitably corrupt world. I know...consistency and facts are part of that great evil "science" that also has to be abolished for the dreaded New Age to dawn. Ellerbe gets well into this later.

     The author goes on to belabour the misogynist nature of early orthodox Christianity. No doubt true, but the Christological content of the early disputes is simply ignored. It's of no interest to her purpose. The economic interactions of Church and state in the Roman Empire are slighted in favour of ideological argument (or assertion). This assertion continues through the first part of the book, and the author's only digression from passing over heresies other than her favourite ones is a condemnation of the Church's disapproval of Origen's idea of reincarnation. There is little doubt that this is part of the author's ideology/theology. We also get a discussion of sex, free will and compulsion/authority though, once more, innocent of what the people at the time considered important. History is supposed to be history, not an ideological "read-back".

     Ellerbe then passes on to medieval times. She states rather than proves that it was the influence of the Church that led to the decline of the West in this period. Sort of extending Gibbon way beyond his wildest ambitions. She goes so far as to say that the practice of "bleeding" in medieval times was due to "the Monks". Go figure ! She mentions many of the "sins" of the medieval Church and misses many more. No doubt Christianity was not a "creative force" in this period, but the author implies that it was responsible for the vast picture of western decline. Barbarian invasions are, of course, irrelevant. The reality was that Christianity and its influence were contradictory , as the Marxists are fond of saying. Some of its actions were beneficial and some were malevolent. Such fine distinctions, however, escape the author.

     The author cites the monumental corruption of the medieval Papacy, something that is well established. The very corruption of the Renaissance Popes, however, was progressive in its own way. The logic of the times also dictated that the Papacy become a secular power, and many of its crimes were for "reasons of state" rather than the abstract motivations that Ellerbe likes to move in. In the end the Church was pretty much a mirror of the secular powers that it alternately fought and allied with, no better nor no worse. The atrocities that happened were typical of the age and might have been worse under some other sort of ideological "guidance" such as that of a more Gnostic Church. Ideology at the time was very much subservient to power politics.

     Ellerby passes a severe judgement on the Protestant Reformation. She denounces the common Protestant theories of free will (or lack thereof) and original sin without recognition of the disputes within Protestantism about such matters. She dates, strangely enough, the concept of an unitary God as opposed to a multiplicity of saints from this era. The veneration of saints is identified with the pantheistic, many faced. view of divinity that she favours. Yes, it is a bit of a stretch. She also notes the supposed rise of a more severe asceticism  which presumably is connected to the ideas of predestination and denial of free will. Once more remember the Gnostics that she has a superficial acquaintance with for how it could have been worse.

     In Chaper 8, The Witch Hunts: The End of Magic and Miracles" the author really hits her stride. Whatever she imagines the "witch craze" was actually a reversal of early Church opinion which opined that most of what was called "witchcraft" was ignorance and superstition. Pretty true actually, though such "witchcraft" was considered orthodox when properly covered with a Christian veneer. The campaign against "witchcraft" was never so extensive as the author imagines.

     The Inquisition played a prominent role in the "witch hunt". Whatever the author says however, the main motive behind this was self-interest and bureaucratic expansion. The so-called "witches" only came into the purview of the 'Holy Office' during its decline when it was running out of real victims. The author (deliberately ?) refuses to examine the extent of the Inquisition's dealing with "witches" and how they compare with its total business. She relies only on anecdote and insinuation. Whatever Ellerbe's sympathies the mass of Inquisitorial victims were "heretics" rather than "witches" if for no other reason than that the estates of heretics were a better source of plunder. I guess, however, that this would spoil the author's narrative of a contest of ideas as opposed to one of interests.

     In Chapter 9 Ellerbe makes her purpose quite clear again with the title 'Alieniation From Nature', Uh huh ! She makes the ideological assertion that a Christian view of the world as "sinful" (once more a step down from her beloved Gnostics) led to some sort of "separation" that became a leitmotif of western society. Oh well, I guess that the vast majority of people who lived in rural areas until recent decades were "obviously" alienated because of this presumed ideology. Just to be obvious the author u8ses this opportunity to sing a little paean to pre-Christian paganism. This was supposedly "non-alienated". Yes, I'm sure !

     The author moves on to the modern age in Chapter 10, 'A World Without God'. In this chapter the author outdoes any of her Jesuit opponents by attempting (and failing in my opinion) to twist facts and logic to say that the modern science that has disproved so much of dogmatic religion is itself a mere development of said religion. Yes, it is quite a stretch, and an accusation that sticks much more to New-Age religiosity than to any secular viewpoint. But if logic and facts are "bad things" and (cough, cough) "alienating" then you can "prove" anything you so damn well please.

     Of course we come face to face with the usual chintzy mystic "proof" of such a thing via a misinterpretation of the quantum world that the author has only a child's version of. Sighhhh ! It seems to occur pretty well everywhere in such a world. The author quotes a person named E.H. Walker to this effect;

     "...the universe is 'inhabited' by an almost unlimited number of conscious, usually non-thinking (oh, non-thinking consciousnesses - mm), entities that are responsible for the detailed working of the universe"

     Once more, uh-huh. God, or gods if you like, as cosmic obsessive compulsives. Ellerby fails to see the humour is such a statement. For those who are interested you can look up this "authority" that the author quotes. For instance you can see his tax-dodge "Cancer Institute" via 'Charity Navigator' where the "fund-raising" expenses are quoted as $10,149,158, the cost of "Administration" (mostly his widow actually) as $457,040 and the tiny, little beast of "programs" at the end as $290,174. There again you can look Walker up on Wikipedia. This long time US military researcher no doubt did his research in an "ant-sexist, anti-racist respect for 'difference' and the natural environment" manner. It has to be true by the worldview of the author because he is "spiritual". I hope his victims in the Third World appreciate such a refined soul.

     I guess the reader can estimate how much I disliked this book. From the opening when she presents her opinion that controlling people through "dictating and controlling their spirituality is the most (sic) insidious and damaging slavery of all" her agenda is quite clear. In a backhand way this book presents a bare-bones account of the "dark side" of Christianity, but the historical facts are treated superficially because of the much more important (to the author) need to fit them into her ideology. It would have been better to present a more thorough history rather than spend effort in trying to hammer square pegs into round holes.

THE SHADY SUCCESS OF THE SECRET SUSHI SYSTEM

THE SHADY SUCCESS OF THE SECRET SUSHI SYSTEM

     Good old Time Magazine. It struggles on in the internet age, devoting more and more of its pages to bite-size "factoids" that rival websites for speed of transit through the intellectual digestive system. Each and every article has to be illustrated - over-illustrated. Colour and highlighting adds to the illusion of ethernet illusion, and the layout owes much more to Facebook than to any school of journalism. I love it, and I'm a long term subscriber who has lived through Time's evolution.

     Every once in awhile it digs up some true gems, and the November 18 edition is no exception. I have to admit that the inevitable long feature articles on the personalities of US politics (Is there any US politics that is not personality-based as opposed to issue-based ?) are eminently skipable. Even for Americans who live in that soap opera. Even Canada's entrance in this contest, good old Rob (Fat) Ford gets a mention. His cameo is splayed across an insert that is 1/2 title, 1/4 photo and an incredible 50 word run on sentence that has almost as many errors of syntax and punctuation as I have fingers.

     Enough of such trivia. The true meat of the issue comes in the back pages. 'The Mysterious Provider of Sushi' is a five paragraph article that it, amazingly, too three people to write. Do the mathematics. Time looks into the murky undersea world of the dreaded "Sushi conglomerate". Who controls the uncooked fish market in the US ? Hold onto your chopsticks; it ain't the Yakuza. Far worse by several orders of magnitude.

     The "Codfather" of this piece is none other than the Unification Church - the Moonies. Nowadays they go by the name of the "Family Federation for World Peace and Unification". Obviously a play for the American market with the buzzword "family" bit. Or could there be another connotation to the word "family", most familiar in places such as Palermo ? Poor Japan. The Koreans have struck back.

     Under yet another alias the Moonies market the morsels to the masses in the USA. The moniker - 'True World Foods'. Cough, cough and triple pneumonia cough. No kidding. The Moonie managers lack a sense of humour or they'd realize the irony of this.. TW denies its connection to the Moonies, but court documents show otherwise. Time found it hard to penetrate further as TW's New Jersey headquarters' phone system didn't work, and phone calls to their New York office went unanswered.

     Time surveyed a selection of 70 restaurants across America, and True World was the supplier for 48 of them. TW counts 7,500 restaurants as customers in the USA. Their uncooked tentacles in this field make the Washington Post coup look trivial.

     Look out Time. Any more raw exposées, and you may find a fish head in your beds. As for me this revelation has spoiled my sushi mania for at least a short while.

Reading Mark Twain...'Christian Science'

Reading Mark Twain...'Christian Science'
     'Christian Science'....Mark Twain, Harper & Brothers, New York, 1907

     I was continuing my task of reading anything available, in print or on the internet, when I came upon this book, over a century old, in the recesses of one of my storage boxes. The volume life in 1899 in The Cosmopolitan magazine. This is the first half of the book. The second half, a worthy addendum to the first, also began life as a periodical series in the North American Review in 1907 even though it had been written about 4 years (Twain's estimate) earlier. The two halves were collected into book form in  the same year.

     At the time of composition Christian Science was the "cult of the day" in the USA, the very heartland of cults. It was actually newsworthy unlike its embalmed modern cadaver. A few decades earlier the Mormons were the most prominent item in the American bestiary of outré religious opinion, but their appeal was minimal in comparison to Mary Eddy's creation.

     The appeal was so great put forward his opinion that CS would grow powerful enough to challenge the Catholic Church itself. He was obviously mistaken on that point, probably because as an American he had a poor appreciation of more sophisticated ways for shepherds to fleece their flocks than those employed by upstart cults in the USA. He based his belief on the supremely authoritarian organization of Christian Science, and the well demonstrated business acumen of its founder.

     The latter was pretty well the only thing that he found to praise Eddy's cult. His book is an extended demolition of the honesty, consistency and writing ability of Eddy. It also touches on Eddy's pretense to originality. As he drives his bulldozer through the Church's edifice the whole polemic is enlightened by Twain's well known wit and sarcasm.

     An examination of CS' documents and Eddy's other writings presents a picture of a very poorly disguised totalitarianism. Eddy is seen to be a grasping tyrant who evolved from a desire for riches to a person whose main desires were for fame and worship. She, in fact, evolved towards an underhanded claim to divinity. In the end she was divided between seeing herself as the modern Christ and seeing herself as the modern equivalent of her Virgin Namesake.

     Twain tears her written output to shreds. Probably an easy task. He does, however, have an admiration for the writing skills of the author of 'Science and Health', the cult's second Bible. He found it impossible what he considered the lucid and coherent style of this book with the confused muddle of pretty well everything else that Eddy put to paper. Thus he formed the opinion that Eddy's book was either ghost written or lifted in bulk from another author.

     While it is obvious true that Eddy borrowed the ideology of her cult from others - some of this Twain mentioned - I think that MT goes a bit too far in attempting to prove that 'Science and Health' had a hidden author. He relied on literary detective work that left too much to the imagination.

     Twain made one major concession to CS' methods. He recognized the power of suggestion and the efficacy of the placebo. Christian Science's methods of "healing" do occasionally seem to work. They are, however, no more efficient than those of a hypnotist. As an aside Eddy did have an earlier association with a hypnotist. In a later feat of bad temper (or bad faith perhaps) she forbade her devoted flock to have anything to do with hypnotism - on penalty of excommunication.

     Personally I think that MT goes too far in his estimation of what hypnotism could do. I am sure, however, that he would agree with the common sense observation that no hypnotist or purveyor of religion has ever performed the miracle...of...curing..an...amputee.

     Altogether this is an amusing little book on a topic that has, mercifully, shrunk into to obscurity. I wonder how Twain would treat the far more numerous cults of our own day.

RELIGION:

PAPAL SINS:

Amazingly enough I finished reading two books on a single day. There are two more rather technical books that I am still reading, but probably few would be interested in them. The first book I finished was the collected fairy tales of the Brothers Grimm. I've already mentioned said book here. The second book is Garry Wills' 'Papal Sin'. You can read it yourself here at Google Books. I hope the referral is right. I often make mistakes in long addresses.

I have to say that the book surprised me. From the title and a brief perusal I expected this book to get into the gritty details of medieval and Renaissance Popes with all the neat stories about simony, nepotism, sexual impropriety and political treachery. Nope. The network of deception that the author heads for began in the 19th century with Pope Pius IX. There is, however, more than enough dogs' dinner in the last 1 1/2 centuries to satisfy the most ardent critic of the Papacy.

Wills is hardly the most ardent. He is still a very devoted Catholic, whatever his heretical opinions. He denies the 1870 Vatican I promulgation of Papal Infallibility from the point of view of Church tradition in addition to the thuggish schemes initiated by Pius to gain the acceptance of his infallibility.

I must say that I enjoyed this book immensely, especially considered the recent death of my Sister Ann who was a nun with heterodox opinions. Wills begins his book with chapters showing the "bad faith" and lies of the Catholic Church. He saves his own reformist opinion for the latter chapters where he contrasts the views of the Church Father Augustine to modern Papal opinion.

Along the way he scatters gems such as the fact that the apostles were married; that there were no priests in the very early times of Christianity and no bishops until even later. He emphasizes the democracy of the early Church and suggests that this should be a model for today's Church.

What can I say here as an ex-Catholic and an atheist for over 45 years ? This book is obviously addressed to other Catholic believers. It makes an appeal to the "winter soldiers" who continue to resist foolish Papal pronouncements.I would recommend it for believers as an eye openers to the fact that there can be dissent in the Catholic Church. Perhaps even unbelievers could profit even more by reading this book. It may allow them to formulate their objections at a higher level.

HUMOUR:

SPEAKING OF RELIGION:

Sort of "old time religion made easy". Glad we're not "back to the Bible" these days.

HUMOUR:

RELIGIOUS MYOPIA:

Yet another winner from Kirktoons.

PERSONAL MOLLY'S TRIP TALES:

FUN AT THE AIRPORT WITH GOD BOY AND GOD GIRL:

We're off and running, or at least hanging around in a lineup waiting for boarding at the airport. Putter, putter, putter, eavesdrop, eavesdrop, eavesdrop.The plane will be flying from the wilds of Winnipeg to a gentle civilized land of milder weather...with an unfortunate stop over in that northern extension of Alabama known as Alberta. Or at least that is what is believed by those that think Noah's Flood deposited it there. The pair in front of us are, appropriately enough, two evangelicals just returning from praying up a storm down east somewhere, and they are in full Jesus mode.

My nose starts twitching when God Boy opens his mouth to launch into his Muslim conspiracy spiel connected with the Cordoba Islamic Centre in New York which he, of course, calls a mosque. Now understand that Molly grew up out in the country on the Canadian prairies. I have also spent over 40 years listening to leftist hogwash of various sorts from 'dialectics' to 'abolishing civilization' with all the nonsense in between. What I can say is that my nose is so good that I can smell the excrement from the hind end of a male animal of the bovine persuasion from 5 miles away...upwind.

The old nostril hairs stand erect as God Boy jumps from the North America continent to (I think) Europe with his concern that "10 years ago there were only 800 mosques and now there are 80,000". He is, of course, off by a factor of about 10. Yet he goes on about how this is true for everywhere in Europe "except Russia".Uh Yeah ! This is prefaced with what really set the old nose hairs tingling. He was "there on a security job for the American government". All that I can say is if the US Empire has been reduced to hiring idiots who brag about such things in public lineups then it is in even more trouble than I could imagine or even want. Sorta reminds me of some of my braggart would-be revolutionist anarchist "comrades".

The conversation goes on, and God Boy has the floor. To my horror he says what may be the only true part of his monologue...he's apparently a "teacher". That I can believe. It doesn't take much smarts to bullshit in front of a bunch of kids at the 'Holy TV Hour Bible School' in Constipation, Alberta. Then we're off into the ozone again about the dastardly Islamic plot concerning the naming of the 'Cordoba House' in New York.

A little aside and a small history lesson here. The Moors invaded Spain in 711 AD, overthrowing the ruling Visigoth kingdom who were not a great source of fun for the average downtrodden peasant. The new rulers were a slight improvement over the Visigoths, particularly the Emirate of Cordoba who set some sort of standard for the day of enlightened rule and tolerance to other religions (Christian and Jewish). The Emirate, however, ceased to be in 1031.Muslim rulers who followed this emirate were at least half as nasty as the Christians. I have a sneaking suspicion that the example of this emirate was high in the minds of those who decided to set up the centre in NYC, in more than childish ignorance of what country they lived in and the equally childish innocence of their belief that Americans would "get the message" of tolerance and living peaceably together. This in a country in which the majority of its citizens can't identify their own states, let alone tell that 'Bahrain" is not a weather condition.

But back to God Boy. He's on a roll. What according to him is the "reason" for naming the centre (mosque-sic) after Cordoba. Well, it's because "in the Second Crusade the Moslems took Cordoba". The Second Crusade (another boring history lesson) by the way was from 1145 to 1149, and its object was the recovery of Edessa which had been recaptured subsequent to its capture in the First Crusade. Let Molly remind you that the Emirate of Cordoba was overthrown by another Muslim power in 1031. Lest you think that God Boy simply is not only about 3,000 kilometers and 100 years out to lunch (or is it 400 years out to lunch) consider the following.

I've already spoken about the naivete of the Muslims who set in motion the idea of the Cordoba Centre. Their ignorance might be compared to that of say a Canadian immigrant to Greece or Turkey ignorant of history who was to praise the wrong country in public company. One could adduce other examples as well. There is what may be described as "honest ignorance", but then there is something that might best be described as "deliberate ignorance with malevolent intent". In such cases one believes a rather treacherous "authority" because the statements of said authority accord with what one wants to believe. If the reader has some slight knowledge of either medicine or anthropology he or she can find great and grievous examples of such malevolent evil and deliberate ignorance amongst the American perversion of anarchism called "primitivism", and their bizarre idea that their fantasy of "traditional healing" can more than replace modern medicine (a great evil in their pretty well religious point of view). But that is certainly another subject.

Where the Holy Rollers of Alberta get their perversion of history is from a peripheral event in the Second Crusade. The crusaders had already acquired a well deserved reputation for treachery, brutality and thievery in the First Crusade. The main efforts of the Byzantine Emperor Manuel during the Second Crusade were to get the armies through Byzantine territory with the minimum of pillage on other Christians. The greatest effort of "fighting for God" of the crusaders, of course, occurred in the Fourth Crusade when the armies of God sacked Constantinople. But during the Second Crusade a number of those bound for the so-called 'Holy Land' saw an opportunity for profit in hiring themselves out to the King of Portugal in his campaign to conquer what is now Lisbon. They were, of course, promised the opportunity of looting. They succeeded, and the inevitable happened.

Sometime, somehow some ill intentioned "authority" amongst the Evangelists got hold of this peripheral factoid, and through great distortion, both deliberate and inadvertent it got worked up into the nonsense that God Boy believes. Somehow Cordoba got thrown into the mix, particularly as it was ideologically useful in present day America. God Boy is, of course, just as unlikely to check his facts as a true believer in the great wisdom of so-called "primitive" people is.

Well let's just say that I was "hot to trot" to get at this guy. The wife told me that I had "the look" on my face that signals that I am about to attack either verbally or physically. It's the same look that I use to deal with street demons in Winnipeg. God knows that I hate to leave gross bullshit uncorrected. On the other hand the self preservation instinct was operating as well. It actually DID go through my mind to call out to security when the argument got too heated and they gathered around that I suspected God Boy of being some sort of "fundamentalist terrorist" who planned to blow the plane up. All that would have accomplished, however, would be for BOTH of us to be in the back rooms. So I shut my face.

Hooray for self control because I would have missed the best part. God Boy was doing his best to be impressive to God Girl, all the way from his "secret agent man" pose to his "intellectual" lectures. God Girl, however, was not to be outdone, and she pulled one of what I assume is a great trump card in such circles...healing. While she was down in Ontario she went traipsing down to a revival meeting at about the same time the rest of us would be heading to the bar. Her problem according to her own view of her condition was that she had had years of "bleeding in the knee" whatever that means. YET...when she prayed and went before "Brother X" (I forget the name) she was "healed". Better than that EVERYBODY, her doctors, her relatives, her friends, strangers, EVERYBODY had always told her that it was her right leg that was the problem. Brother X, however, "discovered" that it was her LEFT leg that was lame. He prayed for its healing, and YES it was healed. Praise God !

At this point the line started to move. God Girl moved forward with the rest of us limping severely ON THE RIGHT LEG. We boarded the plane. God Girl sat forward from us. As we tried to get past God Boy was saying his goodbyes to God Girl. I couldn't escape the impression that I had witnessed some sort of primitive and crude sexual display behavior gone seriously wrong.

Ah well, that was my adventure in anthropology during this trip.

Just as a note to the wise...I have as little sympathy for Isalamic loonies as I do for evil "Christian" loonies. It's just that THEY would NEVER spew their bullshit in a public lineup AND MOST IMPORTANTLY nobody with knowledge would ever suffer consequences for correcting them. Unless, of course, they lived in one of the theocracies that mirror the USA in the Middle East. Consider what you have to fear the next time you travel.

HUMOUR:

A RELIGION I COULD TAKE TO:

HUMOUR:

YOU JUST CAN'T WIN:

Click the graphic for better viewing.

HUMOUR:

THE CREATIONIST GOES TO THE DOCTOR:

Click the graphic for better viewing.

HUMOUR:

MORE NEWS FROM AFAR:

Click on the graphic for better viewing.

HUMOUR:

LESSONS FROM HISTORY:

HUMOUR:

BACKASSWARDS:

HUMOUR:

HIGH NOON AT THE THEOLOGY CORRAL:

HUMOUR:

ALMIGHTY CONFIDENCE:

HUMOUR:

WATCH WHAT YOU SAY:

LOCAL EVENTS - CANADIAN POLITICS:

TRUTH AND RECONCILIATION COMMISSION HEARINGS BEGIN:

Appropriately enough the public events for Canada's Truth and Reconciliation Commission have begun here in Winnipeg, the aboriginal capital of Canada and perhaps of all of North America polar to the Rio Grand. Winnipeg's native population numbers about 68,380 according to Stats Can as of 2007. This is probably an slight underestimate, but it still places the aboriginal population as about 10% of the city. Having lived here for over a quarter of a century I think this is about the right percentage. This is greater in absolute numbers than many other larger cities such as Vancouver and Edmonton which also have substantial numbers of aboriginal people. There are smaller centres such as North Battleford (18%) and Prince Albert (about 33%), both in Saskatchewan where the percentage of aboriginals is greater than that of Winnipeg, but Winnipeg amongst so-called 'major cities' holds pride of place as the city where the "native fact" is the greatest even though the native presence in western Canada is much more obvious generally.

The events of the first hearing of the T&RC at the Forks here in Winnipeg have drawn large crowds despite weather that has been less than clement to say the least. They have garnered extensive press coverage locally and even nationally. For those interested in general news coverage I suggest that they go to the websites of the Winnipeg Free Press and the Winnipeg Sun. For myself I would like to explore, at least briefly, some of the issues behind these events and compare and contrast them to the situation in other countries. I do this with full understanding that I may make grievous mistakes in describing the situation outside of Canada, and I hope that readers from any country mentioned will see fit to correct me if I make too egregious an error.

To begin with the very title of the event seems to be borrowed from the South African context and their own 'Truth and Reconciliation Commission'. The way in which these two settler societies dealt with their indigenous populations were dramatically different, but the 'Canadian way' was similar if not identical to that which took place in the USA and Australia. In South Africa the Boer ruling class essentially "gave up" on the idea of assimilation of what was, after all, the vast majority of the country's population, and even if they constructed their apartheid state by imitation of the Canadian, American and Australian reservation system they never made serious attempts at cultural genocide. In CAA (Canada, America, Australia) various 'do-gooders' took upon themselves the task of "civilizing" the native population ie abolishing them as an identifiable group. To my understanding in Australia this effort was mainly directed towards what they called "half-castes" there ('half breeds' in Canada) while hoping that the aboriginals out in their reserves would gradually become extinct.

The South African commissions are also markedly different from those now being held in Canada in that they are being held in the context of the victory on the part of the majority of the population relatively recently after a successful armed (partially) struggle. They are almost exclusively concerned with events of the last few decades while the Canadian hearings will be concerned with events that extend back to the 1800s and which concern a minority of the population whose armed struggles were defeated in the 19th century. The interesting, and perhaps controversial thing to those outside of Canada (and even to many Canadians), is that the 'death toll' of Canada's residential schools is probably far greater than that of the armed struggle in South Africa, and most of the dead were innocent children on the 'losing side'. YES, the death toll from the Canadian system exceeds by a large number what might actually be termed as "war", and all the victims were innocents.

So how to view the present hearings ? There are similarities between the native experience and that of all of us who endured Catholic schools even if we weren't native. The methods of "discipline" that many people endured (I include myself here) have shown up documented as military torture methods in later years. One might be tempted to view the 'native case' as special pleading, a view that is held by many in Canada. On the other hand those of us who endured the religious school system had certain advantages over the native children. First of all we were not kidnapped and flown to a prison where the jailers spoke a foreign language and insisted that we speak in within days of arrival. Whatever the brutality that we were subjected to which was little different from that that native children endured we at least went home at the end of the day and there was no opportunity for murder. Murder !! That is the only way that many of the things that happened in residential schools could be described.

According to a reference on the Wikipedia site on the Indian Residential Schools it was noted as early as 1909 that the death rate in these schools varied from 35% to 60%. As time went on this rate declined, but it was still horrendous in the 20th century until the schools were finally closed. A lot of this was because the conditions in the schools were very much optimum for the transmission of infectious disease. Group housing in dormitories where the space between beds was two feet for instance. In his 1909 report and in his subsequent book Dr. Peter Bryce claimed that such a situation was actually deliberate. Personally I doubt this given my knowledge of the Roman Catholic Church where brutality is an accepted method but extermination is to be avoided. One dead child equals one less proselytizer in the future. Ignorance and sadism (things that I noted were almost universal amongst Catholic clerics that I had the misfortune of coming in contact with in my childhood ) are totally adequate explanations, and 'conspiracy' does not have to be invoked.

So how to view the present hearings. There are some such as Kevin D. Arnett whose writings are reproduced at the Porkupine Blog who view these hearings entirely negatively. What Kevin sees in these hearings is an "opportunity" to absolve the guilty, and what he says has a certain validity. YES, one of the purposes of such hearings is definitely to "put the issue to rest". On the other hand the hearings will give victims the only opportunity that they will ever have to present what actually happened to the general Canadian public. All that I can say here is that the actual guilty individual parties are mostly dead by now, and that the presentation is much more important than a futile attempt to bring the guilty to justice. YES, this includes the guilty Church organizations. Their liability has been pretty much settled by now.

What I consider important in these hearings is that the full evil of what was done to native children be thoroughly exposed to the general public, and I think that these hearings are a good forum to do that. This exposure can have great positive benefits in the long term as Canada tries to come to terms with its native peoples, and it can promote proper public understanding of the best ways to deal with this legacy. YES, nothing will immediately result from the hearings, but they present an opportunity to change views that will have long term consequences.

As a conclusion to this sad tale everybody should note that the designers and the operators of the residential school system were firmly convinced beyond tha shadow of a doubt that they were "doing good". This sort of result should serve as a cautionary reminder to reformers and revolutionaries of all sorts of the inevitable 'law of unintended consequences' that plagues all human action.

Here are a few references for those who are interested in this issue:

1)Truth and Reconciliation Commission of Canada http://www.trc.ca/ The official site centred here in Winnipeg.

2)Indian Residential School Survivors http://irss,ca/

3)National Residential School Survivors Society http://www.nrss.ca/

4)Assembly of First nations History of Residential Schools http://www.afn.ca/residentialschools/hiostory.html

5)CBC History of the Residential Schools http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2008/05/16

6)Wikipedia History of the Residential Schools http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian-Indian-residential-school-system

WEIRD STUFF:

INSTANT SONS- JUST ADD MILK:

The following from the Care2 site is way off the beaten path. I mean it, way off the beaten path. I present it here as a cautionary example of why clerics of all persuasions should never be allowed even the slightest tiny morsel of political power. There are those amongst the religious right in North America who harbour schemes that are just as strange when viewed from the outside. Anyways, for all you connoisseurs of human irrationality here's the article.

WWWWWWWWWW

Saudi Clerics Advocate Breastfeeding Adult Men
posted by: Robin Marty 1 day ago


I haven't pulled any punches in the past discussing how bothered I am by the laws against women in Saudi Arabia. From ridiculous "guardianship" laws to burdensome rules on being in public with men, to arresting women who even have too much of a tan, it's no wonder the public is beginning to physically fight against the authority in the land.

Obviously, the religious authority knows it has a problem that must be dealt with. But is this really the answer?


Women in Saudi Arabia should give their breast milk to male colleagues and acquaintances in order to avoid breaking strict Islamic law forbidding mixing between the sexes, two powerful Saudi clerics have said. They are at odds, however, over precisely how the milk should be conveyed.

A fatwa issued recently about adult breast-feeding to establish "maternal relations" and preclude the possibility of sexual contact has resulted in a week's worth of newspaper headlines in Saudi Arabia. Some have found the debate so bizarre that they're calling for stricter regulations about how and when fatwas should be issued.

Sheikh Al Obeikan, an adviser to the royal court and consultant to the Ministry of Justice, set off a firestorm of controversy recently when he said on TV that women who come into regular contact with men who aren't related to them ought to give them their breast milk so they will be considered relatives.



One cleric claims simply pumping and having the men drink the milk is enough to create this familial bond. Another, however, does say that "men should suckle the breast milk directly from a woman's breast."

The logic behind the edict is an apparently common practice known as "breast milk siblings" where according to the article, if you provide 5 "fulfilling" breastmilk meals to a male child before the age of two, you and your female family members will not have to cover your faces in front of him later in life, something that is apparently common among nieces and nephews.

But, when translated into somehow trying to provide this connection to an adult, and use it as a loophole in order to allow women to be in the presence of men who are not blood relations, a lot of obvious problems jump to mind. The first, of course, is the assumption that every woman is lactating, when in fact the only candidates for this process would be married mothers with children under the age of two, the traditional cutoff point for breastfeeding in that country. Women aren't just wandering around with milk in their breasts all of the time, married or not, mothers or not. This would provide no outlet for any unmarried woman, who tend to suffer the most under these strict guardianship laws, nor for widows or the elderly.

The second problem is what is meant by "fulfilling" meals. A grown adult obviously would take much more to be "fulfilled" than an infant, or even a toddler, whose stomachs are smaller than an apple.

Third, even with this loophole available, clerics have decreed that it cannot be used with a driver. As women in Saudi Arabia are not allowed to have driver's licenses, no woman would be able to go anywhere outside walking distance without having a man drive her. If this breastfeeding loophole can't be used with someone who can drive them from place to place, they are still essentially trapped without a family member to accompany them, regardless.

Breastfeeding adult males in order to be allowed to be with someone of the opposite sex who is not a family member is no real solution to the issues of Sharia law. In fact, it actually exacerbates them, as it simply reinforces the idea that a woman sole purpose in existence is to extend and tend to the family unit. Women in the country deserve real freedom, not that which is only granted to them if they act as the "sustenance" of the family.

HUMOUR:

I HEAR NUTING, NUTING:

Sex scandals in the Catholic Church.