dawkins showing the strain
Professional atheist Richard Dawkins is told about the Personal Ordinariate for Anglican converts and blows a gasket:
What major institution most deserves the title of greatest force for evil in the world? In a field of stiff competition, the Roman Catholic Church is surely up there among the leaders. The Anglican church has at least a few shreds of decency, traces of kindness and humanity with which Jesus himself might have connected, however tenuously: a generosity of spirit, of respect for women, and of Christ-like compassion for the less fortunate. The Anglican church does not cleave to the dotty idea that a priest, by blessing bread and wine, can transform it literally into a cannibal feast; nor to the nastier idea that possession of testicles is an essential qualification to perform the rite. It does not send its missionaries out to tell deliberate lies to AIDS-weakened Africans, about the alleged ineffectiveness of condoms in protecting against HIV. Whether one agrees with him or not, there is a saintly quality in the Archbishop of Canterbury, a benignity of countenance, a well-meaning sincerity. How does Pope Ratzinger measure up? The comparison is almost embarrassing.
Some years ago a British reviewer of Dawkins, lamenting his decline from conventional academic to anti-Christian polemicist, likened him to a "scientific bag lady screaming at the traffic." The screed above does nothing to weaken that estimate.
Yet I don't think it's the whole story. When a seventh-grade boy brings up three times in twenty minutes his detestation of a particular seventh-grade girl, we can be pretty sure he has a crush on her. By the same token, Dawkins' fulminations are pitched at the emotional level of an overwrought twelve-year old, and seem chosen more to say "notice me!" to the Church than to convince those still unconvinced of her villainy. Note that Dawkins disparages the Catholic Church by denying her "Christ-like compassion." Yet that implies "Christ-like" is a term of approval -- an interesting slip. A true atheist would use the phrase to damn rather than to flatter.
Dawkins is a very confused man. His white-knuckle grip on his hatred suggests that he's in terror of seeing it get away from him. Could it be that he's losing faith in his faithlessness?
(tip to Damian Thompson)
An appeal from our founder, Dr. Jeffrey Mirus:
Dear reader: If you found the information on this page helpful in your pursuit of a better Catholic life, please support our work with a donation. Your donation will help us reach seven million Truth-seeking readers worldwide this year. Thank you!
Our Fall Campaign
Progress toward our year-end goal ($163,080 to go):
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: -
Oct. 30, 2009 8:35 PM ET USA
I am truly unconvinced that Dawkins believes in God.Else why would he deny the being of God. One does not deny something does not exist. Before denying anything one must surely think that it exists. The answer may lie in a hatred of God.Be rid of God by denying his existence.
Posted by: dover beachcomber -
Oct. 30, 2009 2:21 PM ET USA
I hasten to add a clarification which I hope is unneeded: I meant the comments at the Washington Post website, not here!
Posted by: dover beachcomber -
Oct. 30, 2009 12:05 PM ET USA
For another disturbing read, go through some of the comments. Not only is the vileness quotient off the charts, but the writing tells you a lot about the effectiveness of contemporary education.
Posted by: Pete -
Oct. 29, 2009 12:37 PM ET USA
As Fr. Benedict Groeschel says, people like Dawkins and Hitchins give Atheists a bad name! One day the limelight will shine away from Dawkins and he will be confronted by himself.
Posted by: jeremiahjj -
Oct. 28, 2009 11:19 PM ET USA
Those whom Dawkins condemns will be honored long after they are gone. He will not be honored nor remembered beyond his own generation. He has his glory. Let him bask in it.
Posted by: Christopher_Johnson -
Oct. 28, 2009 5:00 PM ET USA
Doubtful. If he decides there's a deity, it'll be the one western liberal Anglicans pray to.
Posted by: peggyann -
Oct. 28, 2009 2:56 PM ET USA
And, so, let us pray!
Posted by: Gil125 -
Oct. 28, 2009 2:16 PM ET USA
"Could it be that he's losing faith in his faithlessness?" We are obliged to pray that he is---for his sake, not that of the Church. The gates of Hell will not prevail against Her, so Richard Dawkins surely won't. But while he breathes, he still has the chance to save his soul, and we must pray for that.