A Leap So Great

I said in an earlier post that the Catholic Church encourages the most egregious forms of superstition.

This does not mean that the majority of Catholics accept such beliefs. The members of my family and friends who are Catholic pay little attention to Padre Pio, for example, and if pressed show great skepticism to his alleged 'marvels.' And the same with Lourdes and Fatima. The reasonably well educated catholics I know never mention these shrines and have no interest in visiting these sites.

We know today that young children are most likely to have a fantasy world, which charming for their age, is not to be taken seriously. I think most Americans are at least vaguely familiar with the McMartin case and other cases where young children have accused innocent adults of the most shocking actions, including sexual molestation. Any fair analysis of the evidence, absent adult pressure, sees these cases as blackmarks on the American judicial system.

If a child runs to us asserting he just saw a flying pig, we laugh and understand the age of the child. But in the Church young children and early adolescents find a welcoming hearer to apparitions of Holy Figures. Certainly, the great amount of research and understanding of these childish 'sightings.' has clearly established the relative frequency of such childish events. But the Church, with no evidence that would satisfy the questions of even the moderately credulous is perfectly willing to give its approval to these fabulous tales.

But even adults claim such miraculous happenings. The stigmatics, none of whom were tested to a degree satisfactory to establish even a low problability of their 'gifts,' abound in Catholic legend. And Padre Pio, the Church's Rasputin, is working his way into some Catholic mainline thinking. I noticed at a mass at my church two weeks ago a Catholic Charities plead for money for the Padre Pio fund, I believe it was called.

Yes, I am aware that the Church rejects some of these incredible maifestations of 'miraculous' happenings. But the criterion is very low for rejection. For example, we have no evidence whatsoever that Lucia "saw" anything at Fatima. The Church simply looks for evidence that what she reported was NOT true; that being almost logically impossible, the 'sighting' is 'accepted.'

Let me add to this post something I was not going to post about until I read today some information about the Pope's upcoming visit to Africa. In the two countries he is visiting the Church is proud to point to the number of minor seminarians in each country. The two countries have a very low education level and a very low economic level, indeed two of the poorest countries in the world. And as I read about the Church's future resting in these improverished and lower educated countries of the 'South' as they are euphemistically referred to, I wonder if this Church emphasis on such countries is not well calculated. Go to countries where economic distress is alarming and where the people are so poorly educated---go to these countries to find new fields for those willing to believe, not just the Creeds, but the elaborate superstitous dressing of the faith. After all, are not children and the uneducated, our least knowledgable, the most likely to accept superstition. And one wonders what type of supervision is in place along with what is taught to these young boys by their celibate priests in these minor seminaries? Is there not a danger here in countries with legal standards so far below the developed countries?

Yes, religion does require, as Kierkegaard said, a leap of faith. Many of us are willing to make that leap. But a transcontinental leap is probably too much for most.