John Paul II was apparently into some kinky shit.
According to a new book, Why A Saint, written by Monsignor Slawomir Oder, the late Pope John Paul II would routinely engage in self-flagellation in order to “bring him closer to Christian perfection.”
According to Oder,
In his closet, among his vestments, there was hung on a clothes hanger a particular kind of belt for pants, which he used as a whip…
When he was bishop in Poland, he often slept on the bare floor so he could practice self-denial and asceticism.
Wow. I’ve heard of Catholic guilt before, but this is ridiculous. If the Pope—supposedly god’s mouthpiece for million’s of Catholics—thought he was worthy of whipping, I can only imagine what he thought of the laymen and what their penance should be for having committed sin.
This episode highlights the incredibly neurotic nature of Catholicism, which like virtually every other sect of Christianity, teaches that humans are born wicked. In truth, it is Catholicism—and religion in general—that is inherently wicked, not humans.
In religion, especially the monotheistic faiths, we see a classic slave mentality at work in the minds of the faithful. It is appropriate that one of the most famous Christians in history whipped himself regularly; much like Southern plantation owners would whip their chattel slaves for having committed some transgression against the master.
Psalm 23:
1 The LORD is my shepherd, I shall not be in want.
2 He makes me lie down in green pastures,
he leads me beside quiet waters,
3 he restores my soul.
He guides me in paths of righteousness
for his name’s sake.
4 Even though I walk
through the valley of the shadow of death,
I will fear no evil,
for you are with me;
your rod and your staff,
they comfort me.
5 You prepare a table before me
in the presence of my enemies.
You anoint my head with oil;
my cup overflows.
6 Surely goodness and love will follow me
all the days of my life,
and I will dwell in the house of the LORD
forever.
In the context of slavery, this last line may resonate especially with those who are familiar with Malcolm X’s description of “house negroes”—slaves that the masters found agreeable and obedient enough to be treated in a more decent manner than the “field negroes.”
Of course, whether a person was a house slave or a field slave, the servitude was quite obviously involuntary. The same cannot be said, however, for metaphysical slavery, which is a self-imposed bondage to a vague and intangible “being” who also demands obedience; and his rules are kindly relayed by his earthly representatives who often call themselves “god’s humble servants.” Indeed, we often hear pastors refer to their “flock,” as in a herd of sheep needing direction.
If you really need convincing of this, look no further than this not uncommon rhetoric from a popular evangelical Christian website:
All men and women are either slaves of Satan or slaves of Jesus Christ, there is no in between. When one comes to Christ in faith, one ceases to be a slave of Satan and becomes a slave of Jesus Christ, his or her Lord. Jesus calls his people out of the darkness of slavery under Satan and out of the bondage power of sins to “marvelous light” and to a whole new relationship with Jesus Christ.
Thus, if you are alive, you are slave. On this matter you have no choice. The only “choice” you have comes in deciding whether to follow Jesus or Satan. I should hardly have to tell you that as far as Christianity is concerned, to reject the premises altogether is tantamount to deciding to be a slave of Satan.
Whence came this demented mentality? I suspect it has something to do with the desire of many to believe that someone is minding the store (or plantation), even if they can’t actually see the owner. Take the owner out of the mix, and the slaves cease to be slaves. But the prospect of freedom is daunting because with freedom comes responsibility. Consequently, humans would be responsible for themselves and answerable to each other. No one else.
This is the antithesis of Christianity, which teaches that Jesus assumed responsibility for the actions of mankind. In turn, humans are answerable to him. Thus, the revealed “wisdom” of the gospels provides a meaning of life and a set of (not always clearly) promulgated rules for living. To reject god is to reject morality handed down from on high. As a consequence, humans would have to construct their own morality from the ground up.
Just as Camus said that committing suicide is an admission that life is too much, believing in god makes a similar confession. Belief declares that one is incapable of living for living’s sake. Bare existence is too much and freedom is too formidable to endure. So enter the manmade master. He provides moral guidance. He provides a feeling of transcendence. And all he asks is your undying obedience to his immutable and timeless laws. He will take away the burdens of freedom and a happy slave you shall be.
- Max
I would have whipped his sorry-ass for free. Hell, I would have PAID!
ReplyDeleteThat's one of the biggest reasons that I don't drink their Kool Aid.
ReplyDeleteFunny they didn't mention the pumps or his leather gimp mask.
ReplyDeleteIs "Christian Perfection" a euphemism for a "Woody"?
ReplyDeleteAmazing what sexually repressed people will do.
ReplyDeleteThis isn't that radical, saints have been doing this for centuries. St. Francis of Assisi used to throw himself into thorn bushes. It's part of the Catholic attempt to make oneself forget the temptations of normal life and understand there is more to life than self-interest.
ReplyDeletehello all you "smart people".....feeling witty and insightful yet?
ReplyDeleteAh, Catholic-bashing, one of the last hatreds you can still get away with.
ReplyDeleteYes, self-flagellation...very weird. But it's not weird for a gay man to have anal sex with a half dozen partners over a weekend.
Catholics (and many other religious devotees) deny themselves and pursue asceticism because they are repulsed by the literal and figurative obesity all around them. Is it weird? Sure. Would I do it? No. But I find people to be oddly selective in what they elect to write at length about in unresearched, uneducated, shallow blogs. Spirituality has as much right to be free from hating and judgement as promiscuity, gluttony, and drug abuse. But then, political correctness is never really about what's "correct", is it? It just allows a new group to make fun just as mercilessly.
Anonymous,
ReplyDeleteFirst off, I'm not sure what gay promiscuity has to do with this post or anything I've ever written. My personal belief is that people are free to do what they want, the pope and gays included. And although I didn't make the pope's self-flagellation the central issue of this post, the fact is that this man's religion drove him to physically and intentionally harm himself. And this isn't even one of the worst cases. We are all aware of what religion can drive people to.
Second, if you take a look my posts on religion, you'll see that I know what I'm talking about, especially in regards to Catholicism since I used to be a Catholic. But not just that. I've actually read the Bible. Have you? If you have, I can't imagine how you can still call yourself a Christian because it's the most murderous and wretched book in the literary canon.
Also, if you peruse my other posts, you'll find that other forms of Christianity, as well as Islam, do not exactly receive high praise. I'm an equal opportunity offender, so don't imply that I only have it in for Catholicism.
You know it's funny. For centuries Catholics slaughtered Jews, Muslims, suspected "witches," Protestants, and other "heretics." Now the shoe is on the other foot. The Church is politically impotent and no longer is in a position to tell people what to think...or else. So when freethinkers speak out about the absurdity of the Church's doctrines and its harmful positions on issues like contraception, whining, crybaby Catholics like you and Bill Donahue come out of the woodwork to tell us how much your feelings have been hurt. Well, until we start burning down your churches, putting Catholics on the rack, and burning your women alive at the stake, I'd be quite thankful that secularism has triumphed in the Western hemisphere.
From the perspective of an atheist-turned-Christian, I find it only slightly ironic that people calling themselves "freethinkers" are so critical of religion. Yes, I have read the Bible. Yes, I do believe the organized church has taken some things out of context. But, honestly? Do you really care if someone WILLINGLY chooses to believe? Isn't that the bane of "freethinkers"—and I find this term insulting, especially when people say I'm not in it by definition—to rant and rave say someone's views are wrong? I believe because I choose to. It shouldn't be that big of a deal.
ReplyDelete