Does this strike anyone else?
I am sure that Professor Dawkins would not do anything so dishonest as have one person write all these entries!
Saturday 26 December 2009
A question
Having just read through these 'evangelistic' testimonies of born-again atheists on Richard Dawkins' site, I am struck by the similarity of style in most, if not all, of the contributions.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I haven't read them all but there seems to be what I can only describe as a dis-engaged quality in the religious "experience" from which Mr Dawkins has so kindly liberated them. Also I note that several of them refer to "believes" when the correct spelling of the noun should be "beliefs". Perhaps the Devil is in the detail and someone with the time could do some textual analysis!
There is a lovely irony in finding that people trying to describe their atheist Road to Damascus, errrr, enlightenment, can only do so by using a language register which most English speakers will only find in a religious context. (And how brilliantly and idiomatically do people for whom English is not (preumably) a first language manage to express themeselves as early 21st Century Englishmen!)
Having read Fr Tim's agony column in the Herald this week, I wonder whether another Fr F might write an extract from the "Dogmatic Atheology" ...
Father,
Was it Aldous Huxley who said, "In the mind of every man, there is a God-shaped blank"?
I recall Fr. Z. some time back saying that we should refer to the Holy Father as the "Pope of Christian Unity" -- to highlight that Benedict's reforms are designed to promote the reunification of Christendom.
Can I propose that the Catholic blogosphere adopts the practice of referring to Richard Dawkins as the "Richard Dawkins, High Priest of Atheism." These "conversion stories" are a case in point: atheism involves far more of a leap of faith than theism. The new atheists are merciless with believers, but they are credulous beyond measure. Let's expose their pseudo-clergy for what they really are.
Why not, Father? After all, intellectual honesty is hardly a qualification for atheism !
I have, long argued that atheism is well on the road to forming itself as a religious institution, It has sacred (foundational) texts a hiercharchy of leaders who are almost clericalised, it has hijacked places of historical significance and venerates them as basilicas of unbelief. What they fail to recognised is that Dawkins (et others) not only misuse their science they have a shaky grasp on history. I suspect we are only about a millenia away from mandatory celibacy for atheists.
Steven;
Ronnie Knox got there almost a century ago; he wrote a witty explanation of how they could be incorporated into the Church of England (and he WASN'T saying that the Church of England didn't believe anything; he was a priest of it at the time !).
If you're interested, read 'Reunion All Round'; I have a suspicion it's available on the web.
Post a Comment