Many atheists, myself included, see certain aspects of religion, and some religions themselves, as scams. Â Tricks played on the gullible, exploitation of the vulnerable. It can be difficult to provide substantive proof to back up these opinions. Â Where scientology is pretty overt in its quest for money, there are far more subtle tactics being played out every day around the world (oh, is that the collection plate?).
One might argue that anyone who is taken in by the claims of any religion might be considered gullible, or vulnerable, but there are certainly those who are more gullible than others. Â I’ve written previously about psychics and mediums, and the way they exploit certain members of our society (and there were some fantastic comments on that post by people who had been taken in by those scammers) but these tactics certainly aren’t limited to the less mainstream belief systems.
A recent example of this is the case of 10,000 people turning up to Knock in Ireland because two visionaries predicted that an apparition of the Virgin Mary would appear. Â Yes, unfortunately you read that correctly, 10,000 people. Â By now you’re probably assuming that one of two things happened. Â Either the apparition did appear, converting every heathen atheist in one foul swoop or it didn’t, and these “visionaries” were laughed out of town.
Well, this blog is still here and active, so I guess option 1 didn’t pan out, so they must have been laughed out of town, right? Again, unfortunately not.
Mr Coleman left the shrine before 4pm, claiming he had witnessed an aparition, as he had anticipated. He said he had received communication from the Virgin Mary but insisted that he was as yet unprepared to reveal the nature of the message.
So one of the “visionaries” saw the apparition he predicted, provided no proof, no verified witness accounts and doesn’t even want to describe what happened. Â Those of us who are inclined to question things might, at this point, be crying foul. Â Fortunately for the “visionaries” their target audience are those who do not question, those who are used to believing absurdities, Catholics.
Like most scams, there is an ingenuity to this. Â The “visionaries” announced that:
…the visitation would only be visible “to people who come with an open heartâ€.
This is a statement that crops up whenever supernatural acts come under scrutiny. Â If you don’t see/experience/feel it, then you aren’t worthy/open (delete as appropriate).
There are two very interesting aspects to this case. Â Firstly, this has been done before by the same visionaries.
Earlier this month an estimated 5,000 gathered at Knock Shrine for a similar gathering with some people claiming to have seen the sun dancing in the sky.
The sun dancing in the sky. Â The sun, dancing in the sky. Â To qualify that claim, I’d like to point you to this description of the TV coverage:
I saw it on TV here in Ireland yesterday. The camera panned across the crowd and there was a 50ish woman using binoculars to get a better look -Â of the sun! Yup, this stuff truly is for idiots.
So clearly the only logical explanation for that is the sun moving in the sky, but only being visible in that particular part of the world. Â Witnesses doing damage to their eyes by staring at the sun couldn’t possibly explain what they saw.
The second interesting aspect to this is that it’s very nearly illegal to actually criticise this event in Ireland. Â The absurd, draconian blasphemy law is doing it’s best to allow the vulnerable to continue to be exploited by people like these “visionaries” (to be clear, I’m not suggesting that they are directly gaining in financial terms from these apparitions) because no one dares speak out against them for fear of prosecution. Â A law like that curtails free speech, permits the vulnerable to be exploited and pushes back progress in religious discourse decades.
And this really brings me back to the point of this post. Â Atheists, at times, do things that I don’t agree with. They, occasionally, make me embarrassed to be an atheist. Â Fortunately, this is a rare occurrence. Â If I were religious, I’d be incredibly angry at events like this which make theists look unstable, deranged, jealous, paranoid and incredibly gullible. Â How can theists be expected to be taken seriously when things like this happen again and again? Â As I’ve learned, you sometimes get tarred with the same brush as the worst of your kind.
I encourage everyone to read the original article, which at least Atheist has linked to. The post as it stands is dishonest in that it leaves out the significant final two paragraphs, wich lays out the position of the Bishop, who is the official spokesman for the Church in his own diocese. Here is the way the article ends:
Mr Coleman said he had been asked by the Virgin Mary to recite the Rosary in the company of a priest in the Basilica and expressed disappointment that the Catholic Church [ie the priest in charge of the church] declined to make one available.
Earlier this week, the Archbishop of Tuam, Dr Michael Neary, issued a statement clarifying the church’s view of Mr Coleman’s predictions.
“It is not healthy, does not give glory to God and . . . is not good witness to the faith to be looking for extraordinary phenomena,†he said.
It may be helpful to read a statement by the same bishop on a separate case where some kind of supernatural event was alleged in his diocese. (Sorry I’m not sure how to include a link. Here is the document I am referring to
http://www.catholicplanet.com/apparitions/TuamArchdiocese.pdf)
This is, in fact, the typical way a bishop would handle this situation. Unlike the visionaries Atheist decries, who are obviously frauds, the Bishop clearly thought that although “no evidence has been presented which might prove beyond reasonable
doubt the occurrence of supernatural phenomena”, still, the “house of prayer” deserved a chance to prove itself. Note, however, the strict guidelines he insisted upon, to ensure that things do not get out of control by enthusiasts, whether well-meaning or not.
eg statues must be written up and approved by the bishop as to what activities and ends the group wished to set up.
eg two priests were appointed by the bishop to assist there, and no others allowed to minister without his permission.
In fact the Church (at an official level) always tends to be skeptical about alleged miracles etc… until there is sufficient evidence that it be declared not contrary to the faith of the Church. Note again, the way this happens: “not contrary” can hardly be called a ringing endorsement, and yet this is the strongest statement the Church makes on these matters, since she accepts no public revelation after the Bible. Thus, noone need believe in any miracle or apparition, even once given official “not contrary to faith” approval.
I have no doubt that there are gullible Catholics, as there are gullible atheists (eg Dawkins enthusiasts) but I also do not think that we, as a whole, are “those who are used to believing absurdities”. Of all the Christian churches, we maintain that faith and reason are “two wings” that work together and ought not be separated.
You’re right, Jonathan, I have no issues with the Bishop nor the Church in this instance. I wasn’t aware that the article gave off that vibe.
The two parties to this farce that I do take issue with are the so-called visionaries and the people who showed up to their non-event. Were you a Catholic, would you not be downright embarrassed that 10,000 people who share the same fundamental beliefs as you, were taken in by this? Would it make you question your beliefs (i.e. if these people also believe these visionaries, am I barking up the wrong tree?)? Were I a more cynical man, I might suggest that these are the motivations behind the Bishop’s reaction.
On your “second interesting aspect” regarding the “absurd, draconian” blasphemy law. Could you explain to me how this differs from “hate speech” legislation which you approved in some earlier post, which I can’t right now find?
Again (whether intentionally or not) you have mislead readers by not stating the conditions for the penalties of the law. One comes under its censure when:
(a) he or she publishes or utters matter that is grossly abusive or insulting in relation to matters held sacred by any religion, thereby causing outrage among a substantial number of the adherents of that religion, and (b) he or she intends, by the publication or utterance of the matter concerned, to cause such outrage.
(b) of course, is rather difficult to prove, but there are some writers who enjoy being abusive… I know you are not one of them, Atheist, because you have written a few posts now expressing your anger over abuse….
(Sorry I omitted the main point of this response, namely, that someone who denied the authenticity of the ‘visions’ – such as the bishop himself – could not be fined under the law).
I don’t recall supporting any proposed hate speech laws previously Jonathan, but I’m more than happy to be corrected (providing you afford me the opportunity to review my position…).
I think the swathe of “hate speech” laws being suggested around the world presents a great danger to the advancement of society. The problem with all these laws, including the Irish one, is that the terminology is necessarily ambiguous.
This blog would possibly fall foul of the blasphemy laws in Ireland, were it originating there (I’ve not checked). I don’t write posts to offend or inflame, but I’m certain (you should see some of the emails I get) that certain people see it that way. And therein lies the problem. To me, religion is impersonal and can be looked at rationally, logically, and is open to critique. To followers of religion, it’s deeply personal, and above criticism. They might consider the questioning of any of their beliefs grossly offensive. In a case where someone finds one of my posts grossly offensive (however that is defined and measured), how do you prove, or disprove, intent?
I am not here to prove the existence of any deity thay will do that far better than me.I was confirmed last year a lady who was avoiding me because of a comment i made was in church after comformion she came looking for me very excited she had a little vision when i was moving towards the Bishop she saw a light cumming down to my left shoulder.Its nice to shere a vision because i was aware and had the same vision.
Let me see if I understand this….if I am a theist, I should be embarrassed because 10,000 people decided to go to see if a vision would take place at some place in Ireland. We do not know if these 10,000 were Catholics/animists/pagans/reps from the local Atheist society or believed in the existence of the ‘wee people’. 2.1 billion people claim to be Christians of one or or another. Somehow, I become responsible for the actions of 1/3 of the world’s population and if one of them does something evil….my faith is proved wrong. Did I miss anything?
I thought that Atheists prided them selves on their logic and rational thought. So when Hitler decided to kill all Jews….this has no impact on Atheism…..or maybe Stalin’s 30 million…..anyone for Mao? Is it a coincidence that the three most evil men in history were Atheists? I am a little more concerned at the possible impact of 3 mass murderers than some deluded mystics in the back woods of Ireland or the 10,000 people who went long for the entertainment value.
If 10,000 people in the backwoods of Ireland send you screaming for the hills away from Theism….how rational is it to stay an Atheist with the millions of dead in the holocaust, Stalin’s purges and the ‘Great Leap Forward’. Face it…..you are grasping at straws to support a worldview for which you have no adequate rational basis and need as much faith as the most fundamentalist .
God chose me to become a christian soldier. My sword is love he also showed me little miracles,the power of love.I will not take the blame for mans inhumanity to man.I will send you true love to you and healing.I will shed a tear for injustice.