Does that mean he’s imperfect? Or that God is imperfect? We’ve all probably addressed the issue of whether an omnipotent being can change its mind about something, but let’s get down to Earth for a moment and address the issue of whether Catholics or anyone should give any respect or deference to a religious idol in the flesh who claims to be the spokesperson for God, but who, from generation to generation, and even within the same tenure, changes his mind on issues due to political and public pressure. In other words, the Pope is and should be treated only as the equivalent of a Prime Minister of a tiny little, but very influential, country tucked away in Rome.
So, why do people give him so much credit where it’s clearly not due? The other day, Pope Benedict XVI accepted British Bishop Richard Williamson back into the church without any hesitation or penalty, despite the fact that the bishop openly denied the Holocaust. Then, after a furor of complaints, the Vatican yesterday demanded that the bishop recant.
Bishop Williamson infamously stated that “[t]he historical evidence… is hugely against 6 million Jews having been deliberately gassed in gas chambers.”
Papers are saying that the reaction is a sign of how much the Vatican had misread the public mood.
The public mood? Since when was the voice of God swayed not by God’s will, but by public mood?
What we have here is a failure to treat people like unelected politicians when that is all they are. The Pope, the Reverend Whatever, the Grand Poobah, Thomas Monson, Benny Hinn, whoever, should be treated with the same deference and respect given to people of the same caliber, like Charles Manson, David Koresh, Jim Jones, and other highly influential people who claimed to have some greater insight into the supernatural than everyone else, but who are, to the rational observer, merely mortal men prone to greed, hatred, racism, sexism, and self-righteousness.
UPDATE: More evidence and support of my notion that people rely way too heavily (which is any at all) on what the Vatican has to say has been cited by PZ Myers on Pharyngula:
Eluana Englaro has been in a vegetative state for 17 years, and her family has finally won the battle to take her off life support. Prime Minister of Italy Silvio Berlusconi consulted with the Vatican to impose an emergency decree blocking the suspension of life support, based on the excuse that she is “in the condition to have babies.”
This is a great example of why religion should not be respected by law, and how people still view the Vatican and Pope as some supreme authority on morality and other issues.
Get the podcast: If the Pope Changes His Mind…, narrated by Hyperkubus!
UPDATE 2: Pope declares that condom use increases AIDS problem.
“You can’t resolve it with the distribution of condoms,” the pope told reporters aboard the Alitalia plane headed to Yaounde. “On the contrary, it increases the problem.”
That’s a classic Pope line. Even John Paul II thought similarly about sex. But what really pisses me off is that the richest church in the world, to which its members tithe 10% of their income, has this to say about the economic difficulties facing those members:
The pope also said Tuesday that he intends to make an appeal for “international solidarity” for Africa in the face of the global economic downturn.
He said that while the church does not propose specific economic solutions, it can give “spiritual and moral” suggestions.
Describing the current crisis as the consequence of “a deficit of ethics in economic structures,” the pope said: “It is here that the church can make a contribution.”
Fucking bullshit.
