Today’s post is my response to Polly Toynbee’s article in the U.K. newspaper The Guardian, Christmas comes with good cheer. The tragedy is the religious baggage.
By the time I reached my early twenties I had rejected Christianity and identified as an atheist for many of the reasons Ms. Toynbee mentions in this article along with my study of Marxism. However, after a series of unexpected events I decided to embrace Catholicism.
Why would I become Catholic? Was I unaware of the hypocritical Catholic politicians, priests, bishops, and popes? Never mind the abuses that some men and women committed on behalf of the church. Did I willfully ignore all this? Of course not.
Photo by Kenny Eliason from Unsplash.com
I also did not ignore the role that Catholics played in the advancement of Western Civilization. The role of Benedictine monks in the modernization of agriculture across Europe. The role of copyist monks who preserved the ancient works of Greek, Roman, and Arabic philosophers (even ones that were contrary to Christian doctrine). The founding of modern universities. Contributions to the advancement of science, particularly in physics, astronomy, and biology. One notable example is physicist and Catholic priest, Georges Lemaitre, the formulator the Big Bang Theory.
Yet this is not a good enough reason to become Catholic (or to abandon Catholicism). Comparing the good and the bad that people did on behalf of a religious or philosophical system is no way to determine if it is true and just. For instance, Ms. Toynbee is fully aware of the atrocities committed by humanists during the French Revolution’s Reign of Terror; guillotining thousands of people in one month to their god of reason. Or the horrors committed by atheistic communist governments against people of religion throughout the 20th Century. Despite knowing all this, Ms. Toynbee should not abandon her atheism. Nor should she continue professing her atheism because of atheist intellectuals’ contributions to society.
So then why is she pulling this strawman argument of pointing out the bad deeds of some religious people as a reason to shed religion? It would be like me telling her to shed atheism because of the bad deeds of some atheists. The argument would have nothing to do with whether atheism is true or false.
In the future, it would be more helpful for Ms. Toynbee to attack the first principles (theological and philosophical assumptions of Christianity) to promote more productive discussion. In addition, my hope is that the Guardian to will further promote this discussion on the de-Christianization of the West by inviting the contributions of people who continue to be intentional in their Christian belief.
