Spe Salvi - B16’s new Encyclical
From Reuters,
Pope Benedict, in a new encyclical released on Friday, said atheism was responsible for some of the “greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice” in history.
The 75-page “Spe Salvi”, which takes its Latin title from a quote by St Paul (in hope we were saved), is an appeal to a pessimistic world to find strength in Christian hope.
Atheism could be regarded by some as a “type of moralism”, particularly in the 19th and 20th centuries, to protest against the injustices of the world and world history, he said.
Reciting arguments made by atheists, he said: “A world marked by so much injustice, innocent suffering, and cynicism of power cannot be the work of a good God. A God with responsibility for such a world would not be a just God, much less a good God.”
History has proven wrong ideologies such as Marxism which say humans had to establish social justice because God did not exist, the Pope wrote.
“It is no accident that this idea has led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice,” the Pope said. Such a concept was grounded in “intrinsic falsity”.
“We have all witnessed the way in which progress, in the wrong hands, can become and has indeed become a terrifying progress in evil. If technical progress is not matched by corresponding progress in man’s ethical formation, in man’s inner growth, then it is not progress at all, but a threat for man and for the world,” he said. [emphasis added]
See, there’s a reason to be scared when “progressives” want to run everything. As usual when something like this comes down from the Vatican, I feel a tad underqualified to analyze it in any sort of public way. For that, I link you to people who are smarter than me, who do this type of thing for a living.
Posted in In the news... | 
November 30th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
““It is no accident that this idea has led to the greatest forms of cruelty and violations of justice,” the Pope said”
Ah the musings of those who conveniently forget the Spanish Inquisition….
After 10,000 years, religion brough us a flat Earth, leeches for medical care, and death to those who disagreed.
After 400 years, science has CURED a number of diseasesm proven the Earth to be round, helped us travel to the moon.
Yeah, religion has it ALL OVER science.
November 30th, 2007 at 9:42 pm
Ah the musings of someone who didn’t even read the frickin’ post. First of all, not that truth should ever get in the way of a good argument, how about checking the facts on the Spanish Inquisition? Currently accepted estimates put the death toll at 4,000 over 350 years. That’s just a few more than were killed on 9/11, and way fewer than 6 million in the holocaust. For a good look at the truth behind the Inquisition, check out http://www.crisismagazine.com/october2003/madden.htm.
As for the rest of your rantings, never once in my post did I say there was anything bad about science (nor did the Pope in his encyclical as far as I can tell.) The Holy Father spoke specifically of atheism as causing numerous problems, and he expounded on that in detail with respect to Marxism, which led to some nasty totalitarian regimes in his lifetime and ours.
I could argue that science has created problems and increase the spread of disease, by giving us things like condoms that fail, vaccinations that contain mercury that seem linked to increased autism rates, not to mention the science of industry and travel which has created a massive “carbon footprint” that’s causing “global warming” which causes snowy winters and hurricanes and the lack of hurricanes and droughts and so on, and which you atheists have largely selected as your neo-pagan earth worship religion…
but I won’t, because that would be way off topic!
Better luck next time, and try to stick with the topic.
November 30th, 2007 at 11:43 pm
The Nazi party, following an atheistic, scientific, Darwininain philosophy, caused the deaths of 6 million Jews and millions of other minorities, sparked a war that claimed 50 million lives.
The Communist parties in the USSR and elsewhere, following Marxist, Darwinian, and secular idealogy, killed 100s of millions more.
Abortion, since life IS at conception, adds 100s million MORE deaths.
Atheisim. No absolutes, only the strong survive. Science has cured diseases but replaced them with weapons of mass destruction. Biology replaced with chemistry.
Power without restraint is criminal andn that is what science and atheism are together.
November 30th, 2007 at 11:46 pm
Also, it was not religion but narrow mindedness, the classic human shortcoming, that brought us most of what you ascribe to religion. Obviously atheists are now bringing us their own versions of this condition with their war against religion.
Is it not funny that you say that religion brought death to all opposed but then persecute religion everywhere?
December 1st, 2007 at 6:25 am
Ok, so only(!) 4,000 people died during the Inquisition, how about the general terror people lived under? the confiscation of property, the general abuse of the populace? The torture, extended imprisonment? (sound familiar?) Killing someone’s not nearly as useful as turning them into your slave.
And I don’t understand how the Xtian Hitler killing 6,000,000 people is supposed to be a defense for the Spanish Inquisition. Please elaborate.
No, you didn’t specifically degrade science in your post, I actually don’t think you said much of ANYTHING in your post (beside opining your flagrant obeisance to the Pope). But the consistent disregard of the utter lack of any sort of physical evidence of a higher being should never be ignored.
“increase the spread of disease, by giving us things like condoms that fail”
Do you know that since Bush has instituted the abstinence-only programs, the level of STD infection has increased significantly? That America has suffered an outbreak of STD’s since 2000? The levels of infection have risen by double-digits in less than a decade? How about the fact that if properly used, and consistently used, condoms can prevent infection up to 97% of the time? That sounds like condoms have a net positive effect to me! But don’t let the facts fly in the face of your ‘truth,’ ok?
Sure, we have ballooned our ‘carbon footprint’ but as our KNOWLEDGE progresses, so does our understanding of our impact upon the planet. Thank you for being able to admit that man CAN effect the Earth, instead of insisting that Global Warming is a myth, as a sizable portion of the Xtian community chooses to, think you can spread the word? Science is helping to correct the very problems it has caused. Tell you what, give the planet 20 billion people (it’s coming, the “I need to populate the earth with as many Xtians babies I can” people are working on our overpopulation problem as we speak!) You take 10 billion of them, I’ll take the other ten, and we’ll see who can feed their people, those who follow science, or those who follow faith. Bring on the loaves and fishes!
neo-pagan earth worship? Hmm…I don’t really worship the Earth…but I do respect it. I can touch it, I can feel it, I can smell it, I can hear it, I can taste it, and I don’t have to tithe 10% of my stuff to it. Which of those can I do with God? Without the Ouija Board effect?
Off-topic? how? The subject of the Pope’s statement was essentially ‘Atheism Sucks’ I disagree, and pointed out a couple of reasons why, how is that off-topic?
December 1st, 2007 at 8:41 am
Apparently you missed the sarcasm. I was commenting how those who laud science and hate religion, who talk about how great science is, seem to also be the anti-capitalist kool-aid drinkers who talk about how we are going to destroy the planet. I happen to believe in climate change which is caused by forces outside our control, like the sun being hotter…that would explain the recent global warming on Mars; for that matter, it would also explain why we experience cycles that are unrelated to what we do (30 years ago the globalarmists were saying we were going into a new ice age; in the late 1800’s the scientific elite was afraid we were overheating, etc.) The Pope said a lot more in the Encyclical than “atheism sucks.”
It’s unfortunate that you have not been gifted with faith which transcends that which you can merely see, touch, and have scientific evidence for.
December 1st, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Why the false dichotomy between faith and science? As an educator, this very argument is one that never fails to get to me. As Benedict himself would point out, if there is one God, there is one Truth, and that Truth cannot contradict itself. I claim not, here, some sort of God-of-the-gaps theory. One cannot find physical evidence of God–other than Creation (Rom 1), of course (but to the pure, all things are pure)–and it seems silly to me to attempt to “prove” God with science. We must understand that our reality has “layers.” To look only at the chemical bond of ink and paper would be to miss the letters, words, syntax, sentences, meaning of the passage. To look at the earth’s age and say, “Well, that took longer than six days. God is dead,” would be to miss the drama, the give and take, of creation, evolution, life, love, and the human passions. Indeed, those on both ends of the fabricated faith/science divide do God injustice.
Too, let us not forget that as human beings we all have failings. Perhaps the Church of the Renaissance should have stopped the Inquisition, but what is so rarely reported is that the Church did temper it. The Inquisition in Spain was run by the reconquista government–NOT the Church, which again, in its participation, slowed the bloodshed. That’s not an excuse: were men not prone to fail even in their own expectations (concupiscence, anyone?), perhaps the Church could have done more.
The Catholic Church created and aided science for a millenium. Cathedrals were the first places where astronomy was studied. Priests have been doctors, paleontologists, biologists, geneticists (Mendel, anyone?), physicists, and so forth. Benedict studied Einstein and other great names of physics in seminary. It is, perhaps, time for those of us who claim to be intelligent to chose to forego the “popular history” of the world and the Church–say, the “flat world,” “Inquisition,” and “Galileo” arguments for a start–and find out what really happened (no intelligent person thought the world flat, for example–that story’s as true as George’s cherry tree). Perhaps it’s time for us, too, to recognize that we can’t always blame the institution for the failings of the one in charge.
Also, let’s recognize that just because Hitler was born Catholic doesn’t mean that he was Catholic. His killing of Christians who spoke out against him (i.e., Bonhoeffer), his disdain for the “Dying God” of Christianity, and his manipulation of Christian beliefs to further provoke the German people into supporting him–not to mention his endorsement of the old Nordic gods–all stand against the claim that he was Christian. He was a follower of Nietzsche–one Frederick, as I understand it, would have hated. He was a Hegelian, believing that the NAZI party was the fulfillment of Hegel’s philosophical Absolute.
All that is even only partially good can be used for evil. That is why we need men who are humble to show us the way. Thanks be to God for the Holy Father; may his life be long.
God be praised, now, and forever, and forever!