Dawkins sure had the big talk. Last month he asked the question, "Should the pope resign?" and answered,
"No. As the College of Cardinals must have recognized when they elected him, he is perfectly - ideally - qualified to lead the Roman Catholic Church. A leering old villain in a frock, who spent decades conspiring behind closed doors for the position he now holds; a man who believes he is infallible and acts the part; a man whose preaching of scientific falsehood is responsible for the deaths of countless AIDS victims in Africa; a man whose first instinct when his priests are caught with their pants down is to cover up the scandal and damn the young victims to silence: in short, exactly the right man for the job. He should not resign, moreover, because he is perfectly positioned to accelerate the downfall of the evil, corrupt organization whose character he fits like a glove, and of which he is the absolute and historically appropriate monarch. No, Pope Ratzinger should not resign. He should remain in charge of the whole rotten edifice - the whole profiteering, woman-fearing, guilt-gorging, truth-hating, child-raping institution - while it tumbles, amid a stench of incense and a rain of tourist-kitsch sacred hearts and preposterously crowned virgins, about his ears."2.
This month, Protestant Dawkins apparently had linked with fellow atheist, Christopher Hitchens, on a social agenda to make sure that justice was done.
The thought made me smile, because no one takes on the pope. He’s too big, too powerful, too lofty, and too loved by too many for two atheists to hold him accountable for anything. It’s a matter of survival of the fittest. The two out-spoken atheists would be lucky to get a balcony-wave in their general direction, let alone their day in court with the pope.
I had more skepticism than a combined Hitchens and Dawkins would have at a Benny Hinn healing meeting.
Of course, it wasn’t true. The good professor was all talk. He said that any talk of an arrest was an exaggeration. A misunderstanding. Media spin. Like when the missing link was found in 2009. Hype. That’s all. Like when the professor said that he believed we were the products of aliens. He didn’t mean that. And he didn’t mean this. David didn’t have a tiny stone to sling.
Notes:
1. http://ow.ly/1wZuk
2. http://richarddawkins.net/articles/5341
Tuesday, April 13, 2010
Dawkins and the Pope
