Convert, convert, convert her! An update on the Catholic Church and witches....

The Catholic Church has issued a little booklet about converting witches - perhaps some progress from putting them to the torch but still just a little barking!

A guide on how to convert witches to Christianity has been published by the Roman Catholic Church in Britain.

The move comes in response to fears that growing numbers of teenagers are being lured into Wicca, occult practices and paganism by the heroic depiction of witches in entertainment including the Harry Potter and The Sorcerer’s Apprentice films, and TV.

The booklet, called Wicca and Witchcraft: Understanding the Dangers, offers parents advice on what to do if one of their children takes an interest in witchcraft.

Apparently witches are bad because there's a link to:

Behind the glamour there were ‘grave dangers’ because of its link to the occult and the sinister movement championed by satanist Aleister Crowley.

Now leaving aside the fact that Crowley wasn't a Satanist, I find the idea that all this jolly filmic witchcraft is a recruiting sergeant for the devil to be quite entertaining. But not as entertaining as the author's rationale:

To marginalised and spiritually hungry generations the growing spiritual phenomena of Wicca and witchcraft have proved attractive, with much to offer: power, supernatural abilities and socially acceptable agendas such as eco-activism and feminism.

Presumably the tactic is to persuade these spiritual proto-feminists to join a church run by men? Now that's going to work well, isn't it! Come to church with me and watch the back of some bloke while he waves wine and wafers around!

.....

All things must end....

The last great European union - that of the Catholic Church - collapsed under the weight of its own arrogance and corruption. Between the selling of tickets to paradise and the operation of a secular empire in central Italy, the church lost much of its purpose. We should not be surprised by the fact that the pope who caused such bother to Henry VIII was a Medici - essentially a man appointed for his political clout in the interminable wars of the Italian renaissance rather than as an adequate leader of a great union. And that Medici pope succeeded a previous Medici pope - a man not even a priest before his appointment to the Holy See.

For all the good that the Catholic Church achieved in the thousand years from the fall of Rome and the reformation - and there was much - it had served its purpose. The idea of a Europe unified under one church did not suit a continent of city states and emerging nations. And the rulers of these places seized on the fragmentation to set out their own paths - adopting protestantism as an opportunity to escape the priests' controls. But the big driver of change wasn't just the power hungry like Henry but a change in the world. People were now more literate. The success of trade had brought about a new, powerful merchant class and it was this class in Germany, England and France who become the vanguard of reform.

Today we look again at an out-of-touch, arrogant, secretive and powerful European elite - fawned over by the courtiers of kings but loathed by those shaking the earth's foundations. The response of this elite - as was the case with the Catholic Church before - is to restrict, to ban, to control, to direct. To make use of their power to subdue legitimate protect, to prevent the propagation of contrary opinion and to suborn merchants, mayors and guildmasters.

I do not know the day this edifice of corrupt power will fall - it is only five decades old, a mere flash in time compared to the rule of the Church. But fall it will. When the people are asked about the choices of the elite they reject them. Votes are characterised by protest, abstention and anger. And the courtiers continue their dance around the elite - unaware that their time has gone. These are the men and women - some well-meaning but mostly self-serving - who stand between us and the day of liberty.

.....

All things must end....

The last great European union - that of the Catholic Church - collapsed under the weight of its own arrogance and corruption. Between the selling of tickets to paradise and the operation of a secular empire in central Italy, the church lost much of its purpose. We should not be surprised by the fact that the pope who caused such bother to Henry VIII was a Medici - essentially a man appointed for his political clout in the interminable wars of the Italian renaissance rather than as an adequate leader of a great union. And that Medici pope succeeded a previous Medici pope - a man not even a priest before his appointment to the Holy See.

For all the good that the Catholic Church achieved in the thousand years from the fall of Rome and the reformation - and there was much - it had served its purpose. The idea of a Europe unified under one church did not suit a continent of city states and emerging nations. And the rulers of these places seized on the fragmentation to set out their own paths - adopting protestantism as an opportunity to escape the priests' controls. But the big driver of change wasn't just the power hungry like Henry but a change in the world. People were now more literate. The success of trade had brought about a new, powerful merchant class and it was this class in Germany, England and France who become the vanguard of reform.

Today we look again at an out-of-touch, arrogant, secretive and powerful European elite - fawned over by the courtiers of kings but loathed by those shaking the earth's foundations. The response of this elite - as was the case with the Catholic Church before - is to restrict, to ban, to control, to direct. To make use of their power to subdue legitimate protect, to prevent the propagation of contrary opinion and to suborn merchants, mayors and guildmasters.

I do not know the day this edifice of corrupt power will fall - it is only five decades old, a mere flash in time compared to the rule of the Church. But fall it will. When the people are asked about the choices of the elite they reject them. Votes are characterised by protest, abstention and anger. And the courtiers continue their dance around the elite - unaware that their time has gone. These are the men and women - some well-meaning but mostly self-serving - who stand between us and the day of liberty.

.....

Banks, budgets and the Archbishop calling for unethical behaviour

****

Every now and then national newspapers – in what I guess is some form of social service – hand over prominent columns to senior churchmen. Mostly the resulting mushy thinking can be ignored or ridiculed in the same manner we treat thought for the day but sometimes the opinions expressed are thoroughly disturbing.

The Sunday Telegraph published a column penned by the Archbishop of Westminster – England’s top catholic priest – in which he urges the banks (or more specifically the leaders of banks) to behave unethically.

A key part of the change needed is to forge a cultural consensus in the financial sector that its licence to operate depends on a clear and demonstrable commitment to service. Of course, profits have to be made if an efficient and thriving financial sector is in fact to serve society. But the ethical judgment, which has to be transmitted right through the organisations concerned, is that profit must only be a means to this end, and not an end in itself. We have a long way to go to achieve this.

What the priest is saying is that managers within banks should make decisions that are not about securing the maximum return on the capital invested in the business. So what, I hear you all saying? This is wrong – not just against the interests of the business but straightforwardly unethical. Those managers – however much they are paid – are merely agents of the business owners. And the business owners require that the business focus on maximising return on investment (I know this because I am one of those business owners).

Secondly this priest says that financial organisations operate only under licence. Where on earth he gets this idea from (perhaps it comes from on high) but it is again suggesting that there should be some other relationship of significance beside those between owners and managers and between the business and its customers. Again it is unethical to suggest that a business should only operate under some unspecified entitlement rather than as a consequence of the free use of property.

The article then descends into typical priest-speak about social justice, equality and demonstrating a profound ignorance of economics and the point of measuring economic performance. And up pops the mushy thinking:

A great deal of the support which any government needs in such difficult circumstances will depend on the extent to which it is seen to be acting impartially and prudently, with a demonstrable care for basic human needs and a continuing sense of our responsibility in the wider world. A powerfully positive message will be sent if in Tuesday’s Budget the overseas aid programme to assist the development of the world’s poorest people is not cut.

Sorry Archbishop but the support for the government will come if it’s seen to be sorting out the mess – that’s it really. Where it matters – the bond markets, the stock exchange, the real economy – the positive response will come if the deficit is eliminated and the debt begins to fall. And not giving India £300 million thereby allowing them to buy up our manufacturing industry might be a good start towards achieving that aim.

...

Unforgivable...

***

I must admit to an equivocal relationship with the Catholic Church. I was brought up as a Catholic and much of my family are still practicing Catholics (although some have moved on to other forms of enthusiasm). But like most observers, I have found the ever more lurid stories of priestly behaviour very disturbing.

I attended Catholic schools from the age of seven, served at the altar, sang in choirs and took an active part in Catholic youth organisations. At no point during that time did I encounter or hear about the sort of behaviour that has filled the newspapers and airwaves in recent times. I don’t point this out by way of excuse, justification or explanation but to provide a little context – the context that will be real for most people brought up as Catholics. We weren’t abused, beaten or exploited by the clergy – or indeed by any other figures of Catholic authority.

So like many brought up in this way, confusion reigns. Whatever we may think of the faith these days, the priests, monks and nuns we knew were mostly caring, supportive and admirable men and women who – it seemed to me – had made a genuine commitment to their faith and to the mission of the church. I don’t doubt that most of the Catholic clergy still conforms to this character whatever has happened around them. These men and women will have been cruelly hurt – even betrayed – by what has come to light.

None of this, however, provides any excuse for the Church’s leadership. That there were – and maybe still are – paedophile clergy is perhaps understandable. What is beyond comprehension is that the church chose to cover up, to excuse and to obfuscate this activity. Had abusive clergy been defrocked, condemned and handed over to the police, the church would have received praise for its positive attitude to child protection. As it stands, though, the behaviour of senior clergy beggars belief – it is simply unforgivable to pretend that the problem could be dealt with by moving abusive priests elsewhere or giving them a gentle pep talk.

The result of this is that the good men and women who have committed themselves to the church’s mission are betrayed. Nobody will trust them. People will equate the priest with the paedophile., the abbot with the abuser. We will doubt all the men of the church – an injustice for the majority who would never abuse or exploit a relationship with any young person. And sadly, the church cannot resolve this problem because the biggest sinners – if we are to use that word – are those who run the church. Those who allowed their desire to avoid embarrassing exposure to poison and corrupt the whole institution.

I have moved on from the church – it does not matter to me. But for many millions – and especially the genuine, caring clergy – the actions of the Catholic hierarchy represents a monumental, appalling and hideous act of betrayal. Others may be able to forgive the church but many will have had one of their pillars of certainty destroyed. And that cannot be set aside with words or prayers.

...