The Catholic Church is not a force for good in the world: that was the overwhelming verdict after a heated debate this week. Stephen Fry and author/journalist Christopher Hitchens opposed the motion, while Ann Widdecombe and Archbishop John Onaiyekan of Abuja, Nigeria, supported it. Adrian Tippetts gives his view of the debate.
During the two-hour showdown, organised by Intelligence Squared at the Methodist Central Hall, Westminster, Hitchens and Fry mercilessly and articulately lambasted the church for its record of homophobia, child abuse and anti-semitism, as well as its stance on contraception.
Christopher Hitchens wasted no time in living up to his reputation as a bulldog debater: “On the institutionalisation of rape and torture, the maltreatment of children in their care, [the current pope] Joseph Ratzinger said: ‘It is a very serious crisis which demands us in the need for applying to the victims, the most loving pastoral care.’ Well, I’m sorry, they have already had that.”
Full article on Pink News
Great painting!
I was there as well, up top looking down at your lovely head Derren! Seriously though I must say the passion in the room was incredible. Stephen especially delivered a very powerful and personal message to the opposition in the room, which as a ‘pervert’ myself was inspiring to witness.
Dying to see this – can’t wait for it to appear on YouTube.
(Don’t own a TV, and don’t live in Britain, so BBC isn’t an option.)
Stephen Fry’s looking really good and that painting is amazing!!!
Excellent! Good on Fry and Hitchens, bet they were great. Would’ve loved to have been there to see it first hand.
Oohh @Tom…care to be specific?
“No child’s behind left”
A great write-up by Pink News there. Looking forward to watching the debate. Should be an interesting do!
Is there any chance an MP3 or video of this would be available anywhere? Sounds brilliant!
Given Englands genocidal history with Catholics it’s a bit rich for it’s intelligentsia to put it on trial. It would be as if Germany were to put Judaism on trial because of the Orthodox opposition to homosexuality. Most Catholic countries have civil partnerships, most have every liberal law in the book. Why are Anglo Saxons concerned with their age old klu klux clan/ orange order bigotry. I am sorry folks, the race that gave the world fanatical Protestantism, and the Orange order and the Klu Klux Klan (all if them anti- Katholic) should try and move away from it’s centuries old hatreds.
Here’s as good a place as any to show you guys this: http://4gifs.com/gallery/d/128569-1/Dawkins_Watson.jpg
It’s uncanny!
When & where was this broadcast? Is there any format available online yet?
I am very jealous of anyone who was able to attend, especially Derren because he had dinner with Hitchens & Stephen Fry afterward. In addition, I am jealous of Hitchens & Stephen Fry because they had dinner with Derren. So, lotta jealousy about that night, basically.
Looks amazing – Christopher Hitchens may a miserable old cur, but he cracks me up with those one liners. And can imagine how eloquent Mr. Fry will be…always is, really
Stephen Fry has lost so much weight, looks really younger! Was Derren Brown actually on the panel debating it or was he a spectator, because I thought he was on the panel for some strange reason…..
This makes me wish that I could have been there. Stephen Fry is amazing!
Going to a debate myself later this year with my philosophy class: The Theory of Creation…
@Eugene – human behaviour requires an ‘enemy’. It helps bond people who might actually otherwise have diametrically opposed views to a common cause, and allows them to avoid any kind of introspection or self examination. As long as ‘they’ are evil, ‘our’ behaviour doesn’t require examination.
If the Catholics weren’t there to paint as the source of all evil, then the militant secularists (whose religious zeal would, ironically enough, put the Inquisition to shame) might have to pause for a moment and think about their own shortcomings, and that would never do.
Ah, the Catholic church. But it’s a bit like shooting fish in a barrel. (Actually, has anyone tried shooting fish in a barrel? With the distorted parallax, it might be quite difficult)
This sounds so exciting, I can’t wait to watch it! @JibJib, Derren was just a spectator. x
Nice to see that the church who brought us all out of the dark ages (apparently) now looks like its come from the dark ages via the people who are arguing FOR it and its policys.
I forsee many long and heated debates over this with ignorant religous people waving the rather wafer thing but entirely believable ‘Faith’ card about like its a solid fact that can outweigh any argument.
Personally i say let the Church do what it likes – as long as it doesnt involve major life changing decisions for anyone else!
How do you win a fight against people that believe so strongly in something that has no proof of existance and relies on pure faith?
@Jonathan – it is shooting fish in a barrel, but what’s more it’s a complete waste of time.
I don’t get this. If you don’t like the church, absolutely *fine*. But stop moaning about it and provide an alternative! People join churches because they fulfill a need. Stop trying to tell people that need doesn’t exist, and start providing a secular alternative and the church will soon waste way.
If people like Stephen and the rest of you spent less time shaking their fists at the church and instead put some effort into handing out condoms in Africa, or opening schools, or running youth and street projects, maybe you’d actually change things.
We’re a bit behind schedule, but we are relaunching our website very soon (hopefully in a couple of weeks), so you’ll be able to view videos of all past events and much more – for free. We will feature the very best intellectual video from around the world and paying subscribers will be able to access written briefings (essential primers) for a whole range of divisive debates.
Isn’t Stephen looking good these days? Would love to see this, believe Derren said on Twitter it was being broadcast somewhen in early November.
LC x
This argument cannot be begun in 650 characters, but the terms of it seem wrong. “The Church” is not a force for good? Tell that to those in Calcutta who were looked after by Mother Theresa. There have been despicable individuals in the Church, sure. The Church has handled those individuals despicably in the past, sure. There are issues like abortion and contraception which have been misrepresented and misunderstood in the media – often by people who aren’t Catholic so haven’t fully understood btw (the arse who wrote in CV got an assmidget for doing just that the other day!). There’s a bit more, but no room…
… By the yardsticks then of despicable people, despicable management and misrepresentation, then “not a force for good” applies to democracy, the NHS, the state education system, the industrial revolution, the enlightenment, the renaissance, the Post Office, the Cambridge Footlights, the Magic Circle, the Morriston Orpheus Male Voice Choir – pretty much anything involving humans. Most people would lose a debate to these two if the were arguing in favour of the motion “Black is White”. Twisting this to make it proof of the motion is about as worthwhile as trying to prove God’s existence.It proves these two are clever men, and no more.
If people like Stephen and the rest of you spent less time shaking their fists at the church and instead put some effort into handing out condoms in Africa, or opening schools, or running youth and street projects, maybe you’d actually change things.
It’s rather impertinent to tell strangers that they are not making an effort to change things unless you are very confident that they don’t.
DioniC,
Yes, Stephen has trimmed down impressively. I gather it was travelling in Douglas’ footsteps that did it.
Tim – I strongly reccommend you read “The Missionary Position: Mother Teresa In Theory And Practice” by Christopher Hitchens, if you think Mother Teresa “looked after” any of those poor people in Calcutta.
As an ex-Catholic I “need” a healthy end to spiralling forced delusion.
My “alternative” is therapy for punitive treatments endured from this authority & their medical cronies, for being a “sick” 10 yr old.
Whosoever imputes God, Spirit and Mind to preserve their agency, then selectively evokes unlearned reduction – that corporeal anatomy is ALSO absolute – to persuade gender I.D. prior to it’s full development, deserve burden of targeted rage.
As childhood experiences do, consequences also appear in “major life changing decisions” of others in one’s ecology…
I need religious doom dealers decide to run from my doorstep!
love the painting be back soon
@Loz – I will do that. Thanks for the recommendation.
The programme is aired this Saturday evening various times on BBC World which I think is available on Sky and certainly most hotel rooms round the world. May Ra be with you all.
Very interesting and amusing subject. I read with great pleasure.
@Loz – just for clarity, there are two “Tims” here (I shall henceforth be “Tim (TJ)”) – I wrote the comment at 11:35, but not the Mother Theresa comments.
I will say, MT notwithstanding, that I know a seriously ill person for whom the church in the UK provide a 24 hour care and support service. A nun or priest visits and checks them every day; they will come round day or night to provide companionship if called. The church pays for them to do a distance learning course to exercise their mind and stop them going nuts, and it pays for them to take a holiday every year, even if it is to Rome. In short, the church cares for them.
[cont...]
[...cont]
And I add although I don’t think it’s relevant, that the church does this despite the fact that she married outside the church, is a divorcee who brought up children as a single mother and is by no means a ‘perfect Catholic’.
What makes me angry is this idea that because the church is not perfect (it really isn’t,) then everything it does is automatically bad and it should be torn down.
Secular society IS NOT providing this sort of care. It is FAILING. *That* is why churches flourish.
Secularists should get their own house in order and demonstrate secular civil society can actually work before starting to attack the church.
@Don: It is indeed impertinent, and I guess I should apologise for that. I’m not convinced it’s any more impertinent than setting yourself up as some kind of moral arbiter based on the rather limited qualifications of being a relatively amusing comedian who can read an autocue, though.
What I can say without impertinence is that whatever effort Fry, or indeed Hitchens, or Dawkins, or even Derren Brown and the rest of you are making, it *isn’t working so far*.
It seems to me extraordinarily impertinent to set about dismantling the structures that are out there if you haven’t got a reasonable alternative. Spiteful and vindictive, even.
Faith is the denial of observation so that belief can be preserved. Any Catholic will thrive with smugness at any evidence that points to the existence of God, but show them evidence that he didn’t exist and their back will be turned before you even have the chance to explain yourself.
@ Tim (NOT TJ) If everyone, including Catholics and atheists alike, opened schools, did work in Africa, did street projects, the World would be a much better place. Why should the atheists with no ‘belief’ in an apparently benevolent higher being be the ones to do God’s ‘benevolent’ work? Surely, if this ‘caring’ God already existed there wouldn’t be any need.
Also, @Tim (TJ), are you saying that the nun and priest from the church helping this seriously ill person wouldn’t do this had they not have been religious? Surely generosity and care is more part of a person’s personality than the religion they ‘serve’ under. Helping people should be an individual decision, doing it because you are genuinely caring, not because some ancient book tells you to be. And if you tell me that these nuns and priests ARE indeed genuinely caring anyway, then the fact that they are Catholic is of no relevance. Whether I’m athiest or religious, helping out the local homeless shelter has nothing to do with belief.
Apologies for the confusion of there being two Tims. I’m the other one. Story of my life… always the bridesmaid…
And another thing, loads and loads of people turn to Catholicism or Christianity because something apparently ‘miraculous’ has happened to them. I watched a programme a few years ago about a woman who gave birth to quadruplets. The doctor told her she had a 1 in 64 million chance of this happening. She claimed it to be a miracle, an act of God. Well, no it’s not, because to assume that this 1 in 64 million chance is a miracle is to significantly underestimate the number of things that there are. I have one more post but no more room (my last, I promise.)
I saw an article about a teenager in America who cried blood. Scientists said that it was an extremely rare condition called…. something or other, but it HAS happened before. Christians, on the other hand, claimed him to be ‘the chosen one’ or something like that and said that it was NOT a rare disease but an act of God. The boy cried blood about 4 hours a day (I think) and said that it hurt to do so. Christians, blind to the scientific explanation of this teenager’s painful tears, instead used it as evidence that their God existed. I think this safely confirms the ignorance of Christian’s to science and, in all honesty, real everyday life.
@Loz – Good point, its tenuous & laughable if St Teresa is cited 2 support the motion here.
Add: she cops it from theologians for emphasis on ‘works-OVER-faith’ vs. the ‘ABOVE-all-there-is-faith’ position of the Vatican.
Her celebrity grew out of that Papal debate, not “looking after” lepers, nor English sexualities.
Intellectualising false dichotomy like works/faith from single Bible verse is wasted talent, then again, assigns ‘em power as we need NOT do good works for heaveny approval.
So “good” is frm where? Evidence show force for good arises frm social, natural reciprocity, mirror neurons, even selfish genes…
@Bekki – I’ve no idea if they would do it if the church wasn’t providing the infrastructure. It’s not really my problem to.
What I am saying is there is no secular organisation performing this service in every village and every town in the country today, right now, in the way that the church is. That seems to me a bigger problem to fix than banging on about whether the church is a ‘force for good’.
Why not go out and do something positive is all I’m suggesting, rather than sniping. Worry less about whether the church is a force for good and worry a bit more about whether you (the royal you) are a force for good.
@bekki – re. comment at 3:45. I’ve no idea if the story is true or not, but your use of one apocryphal tale to draw sweeping conclusion is less than rigorous for someone who believes in ‘science’.
I saw an article about a child who was autistic. A bad scientist said it was because of the MMR vaccine; other scientists said he was talking nonsense. *People* on the other hand, claimed the MMR vaccine causes autism! *People*, blind to the scientific studies, refused to immunise their children and so doing put all children at risk.
I think this safely confirms the ignorance of *People* to science and, in all honesty, real everyday life.
Lord Jesus Christ is God and He is the way to Heaven, He loves you and He is waiting for you
Evidence of God:
- Creation: Universe, Humans, Love, Creatures, Plants etc
- Holy Bible: No one can disprove it, only prove it, the Word of the Lord God.
- People saying: Oh my God, Jesus Christ, Honest to God, I swear to God, Good God etc
- The Meaning of Life: To worship God, to make Him known, to get into a relationship with Him etc.
- Easter: Remembering when Lord Jesus conquered death and sin.
- CHRISTMAS: For Christians, remembering when Lord Jesus came to earth 2009 years ago,
- Timeline: Everything based around Christ
Well that marks the end of a coherent discussion then. Thanks Anonymous…
*bangs head on desk*
For the record, I find evangelical god-botherers just as frustrating as evangelical secularists…
Incidentally, I will say I like the fact this blog and its users do permit interesting discussion on these topics, even if I’m usually on the enemy side
.
The first part of a more realisitic account of the debate can be found here: http://christopherhitchenswatch.blogspot.com/
Whether self-described freethinkers will be interested in grappling with the issues remains to be seen.
Words are no longer what I would see towards those in catholic system who are being guilty .. their type of heaven will come soon I hope .. for them .. I’d call it hell but hey .. seeing their inside .. We could help them their a bit faster. If they are in favor of aids e.g., or raped and abused .. there are tons that are willing to give them that. For free. With the same sensory structure on the inside as them.
@Tim (TJ) I never said I believed in science either. And although I lean more towards science than religion does not mean I believe everything scientists have to say. The article you speak of is in fact in Derren’s book and merely proves how gullible people are, religious or not. The ‘people’ you speak of could be religious or atheist, I’m not sure how it supports your argument. Every living person has faults and we are all gullible at times. Oh and by the way, what was with the “royal you”? I’m only giving my opinion and by judging me on that just gives me less and less faith in the human race. I don’t know what’s happening to society.
Oh and also, @Tim (TJ), how do you know there is no secular organisation performing this sort of service? Have you been to every little village, town or city in England that confirms this statement? Because I very much doubt it. And also, saying whether I’m a force for good? I do what I can, when I can. I help homeless people, I support charities from WSPA to Breast Cancer, I run charity events (I did one a week today for Breast Cancer), I’ve done sponsored runs etc. I try to give to the World what the World gives in return – a place to live. Please enlighten me as to what you do as a source of good, and apologies if I seem judgemental.
Sorry Anonymous but I find much of your proof ****. Few people realise that the origins of a form of Christmas was pagan, celebrated in Europe long before anyone there had heard of Jesus Christ. There’s no evidence to support that God created the Universe and everything in it. The bible could have been twisted and turned by anyone, and while there is no evidence to disprove it, there is no evidence to prove it either (The word of the Lord God isn’t proof.). People saying “Jesus Christ” and so on is blasphemy! Anyone who believed in God wouldn’t take the Lords name in vain. And holidays are just a way for big name shops to make money.
Anonymous is just trolling. Ignore him. Real Christians at least attempt to make a reasonable debate.
@Bekki (3:08): the world would indeed be a better place if that happened. No religion has the monopoly on altruism and it would be ludicrous to claim that. The world is a better place with altruism. Anything that encourages it is a force for good, whether within or without an organized religion. I would think though that personal altruism is more important if you don’t believe in an almighty benevolence, because if we don’t do it noone will.
@Anonymous: I’m sorry but that is hopelessly naive. I’m sure your motivation is good and that you are trying to share something you hold very dear, but the way you present your case is not just ineffective, but anti-effective. If your wish is to preach a message of Christian love, you don’t demonstrate what you are preaching, as your comments shows no attempt to understand the alternative view. Without that element of love, you will push people away from what you “know” to be the truth. I don’t think that is your intention.
@ TJ ‘What I am saying is there is no secular organisation performing this service in every village and every town in the country today, right now, in the way that the church is.’
Yes there is, it’s called the NHS. It’s a bit dismissive towards the millions of nurses who work long hours on poor wages to claim they do not provide any level of care.
Good blog debates aroun here.
There r 1000s of UNDERFUNDED secular NPOs pickin up the pieces of irrational, dysfunctional belief. They get no £££ ‘cos they’re not acculturated with mystical delusion, they’r simply trying 2 make progress.
Similarly, US neuroscientist [WJ Freeman] almost lacked funding 4 denying the mind, sticking 2 his job measuring human neurology.
He notes that doing so failed 2 bring Oprah Winfrey-style tears (and $$$) even though his R&D would *improve* lives. Now he reluctantly calls the brain “a mind” and talks about *saving* lives.
It’s as if we’d prefer gifting sadness and dead people! Wonder why?
Love the discussions on this site. After a few glasses of wine I have just seen the P & T “Vatican” show and I’m ashamed to say I had no idea what the Vatican/Pope has been saying and the morality behind it all… To me as a nurse it seems murderous to try to get HIV/AIDS infected people not to use a condom and I really don’t see what they have to gain from more deaths when the death toll of HIV people in Africa already is way too high – what on earth has condoms got to do with Jesus… Well, I just don’t get it. I understand this pope is more anti-gay than other popes and I am genuinely starting to understand what this one stands for. Big XX
Hi guys, I was at the debate on the 19th. The Catholics where totally out numbered & out classed intellectually.
This debate is due to be aired on BBC World News 7th November at 07:10GMT,15:10,20:10 and again on the 8th.
I was sat very close to the front so got an excellent view, but it’ll be good to see how the BBC have edited this.
The Bishop was clearly not used to being challenged in the way he was, only Ann Widdecombe managed to put up any resistance, even if it was sharply destroyed by the blunt analylitcal fervour of both Hitchens & Fry.