The exposure of the cover-up of violent and sexual abuse by priestsand religious in Dublin has resulted in Pope Benedict recognising for the first time not only that there have been terrible cases of abuse, but that many in the hierarchy have placed guarding the reputation of the Church above their responsibility to abused children and their families. In this case it is an Irish Government backed report that has forced this admission, something he has evaded recognising publicly for years both as Pope and formerly as Cardinal when such cases were first exposed on a large scale in the US, England, Europe, and of course in Ireland. What sort of moral authority does that leave him and the episcopate? What is more given the authoritarian structure of the hierarchy and the way all power is centralised, can he evade personal responsibility for what has happened? Is it also not time for him and the hierarchy and lay Catholics who have trusted him to ask if the root cause of this whole scandal is not just individual or even instituional wickedness or laxity, but rather a consequence of seriously flawed teaching as regards infallibility, morality, sexuality, abortion and birth control. To explore these issues start by reading the section entitled “Pro Life?”
My aim is simply to air some things I have written hoping doing so will encourage reflection and possibly discussion with me.
Some pieces may have some originality. Certainly I derived them from no-one else. Originality can however be over-rated. I think it is better to get things right than be original.
1. Christianity and Supernaturalism has had a long gestation and much reworking and remains a work in progress. In it I develop the thesis that in an attempt to cope with the challenges posed by both historical critical study and the scientific method Christians and members of the other main religions have increasingly resorted to requiring that “people of faith” accept a series of inter-related beliefs which I label “supernaturalism.” In its extreme form it is seen in all forms of fundamentalism, particulalry Roman Catholic and Evangelical fundamentalism. I argue that with regard to Christianity this has lead to a terrible distortion of the religion and attempt to map a way ahead in a second more recent paper entitled 2.Clearing the Way.
My reflections on the Buddhist tradition start with what I hope would be seen as a short, uncontroversial and historically acccurate exposition of basic Buddhist teaching and practice. The Way of the Buddha. There then follows my reflections on the nature of rebirth or samsara. Here I find myself unable to see things in the way accepted by many who come from a traditionally Buddhist background as well as many who have come to the Buddha Way from a Christian, Jewish or agnostic background. The way of seeing things I have come to is expressed in the poem “This I see is Certain”. In it I explore the idea that we are “reborn” constantly in that we initiate consequences and affect the consciousness of others through our actions and intentions. This means fragments of who we are live on and are “born again” in each other even as our individual consciousness dies.
Murder by Another Name is my critique of the “pro-life” stance. It has been written because I think too many of those who reject it, simply speak of the rights of the mother to control her own body and ignore or evade engaging with the arguments used by those who speak from a religious perspecitve. This is what I have sought to do as regards the Christian tradition, particularly as expressed by the Roman Catholic Church. The Evangelical Christian case against terminations is very similar. In this paper I examine these arguments as fully and fairly as I can and come to the conclusion that they are deeply flawed. The consequences of this I think are nothing short of catastrophic and ironically work against one consequence where both those who are “pro-choice” and those who are “pro-life” are generally agreed, ie that abortion is a serious and painful step for a woman to take and that it should not be used simply as a form of birth control.
In looking at the issue I came to see that we need to recognise that there is a distinction between a potential person and an actual person. This first came to me over thirty years ago when I wrote my first paper on the subject in Bristol. I have subsequently found that others, in particular Professor Peter Singer, have developed the same distinction quite independently. I also have to say that I have found doing this study that the line taken by the last three popes not only on abortion, but on sex and sexuality in general and birth control in particular is also deeply flawed. See my rather bitter poem “Three Really Good Servants of God.” If you do not agree with the arguments expressed please send me yours and see if you can change my mind.
I think I have an open mind which can be influenced or changed through presenting me with reasoned argument and accurate observation, so please do not hesitate. Browse and react. Comments both positive and negative will be equally appreciated and all comments will be responded to. I ask you to email me directly as I found leaving the comment boxes open attracted loads of very boring Russian spam. So for a response
email john@johnbaxter.org
John