Kevin Meagher on why it would be a mistake for liberals and those on the left to push Catholics out of the progressive club with their anti-Papal rhetoric.
For many Catholics, the last few weeks have felt like being trapped in the home end at Ibrox during a Rangers versus Celtic “Old Firm” game. The tone of the attacks on the Pope ahead of his state visit to Britain have been splenetic, their tempo relentless. They have ranged from snide criticisms about paying for the state aspects of his visit (an invitation that came from a Labour government) through to the cartoonishly offensive remarks about the Pope’s German origin.
Over at Spiked, Frank Furudi described liberal anti-popery as an “Inquisition-in-reverse”, noting that the Pontiff’s visit seems to have “provided much of the British cultural elite with a figure that it is okay to hate”. Meanwhile Claire Fox, director of the Institute of Ideas, noted that while many reacted with horror at the French and Belgian ban on the burqa, “the response of some secular campaigners shows that such demonisation of religious groups is alive and kicking in the UK”.
The well-promulgated views of atheist deity, Richard Dawkins, will, of course, come as little surprise. But like boxing promoter Don King before a title fight, Dawkins has ratcheted his rhetoric to risible heights of self-parody. His message to the Pope?
“Go home to your tinpot Mussolini-concocted principality and don’t come back.”
Commenting on today’s ‘Protest the Pope’ march in London, the New Statesman’s Laurie Penny wades in:
“On Saturday, I’ll be marching through my home city beside thousands of others to tell bigots and dogmatists everywhere that if they try to push back at the raw edge of modernity, they’re going to get cut. If that conviction makes me anti-Catholic, then just give me a pen and show me where to sign.”
Meanwhile those irascible grumps at the British Secular Society should lie in a darkened room until the Pope has left. His every utterance seems to induce apoplexy.
Like many ordinary Catholics, my disdain for the vulgar, unworthy sentiments of Dawkins and his fellow secular jihadists is total; but I am duty bound to observe Voltaire’s dictum about defending the right to be expressed that with which I profoundly disagree. That is an absolute. As a liberal, I abide by it. But freedom of conscience is what Catholics in Britain demand in return. And that is an absolute too.
Many Catholics do not agree with every dot and comma of liberal-left theology. There are real philosophical differences over a range of social and moral issues; there is no point pretending otherwise. But there is enormous common ground between Catholics and other progressives around fair trade, arms reduction, the environment, human rights, racial justice and “solidarity towards the poor”, as the Pope made clear in his address in Westminster Hall yesterday. These provide the basis of a profound partnership and should not be casually dismissed.
Ordinary lay Catholics and clergy who supplied the infantry of the Make Poverty History campaign, or provide food and friendship to refugees and asylum seekers are progressives too. In deed, not just in word. Some people on the left seem to have a problem internalising that ‘contradiction’. But they had better. An attack on the Pope is an attack on all Catholics. Is the left in this country so over abundant with support that it can afford a ‘friendly fire’ incident that excludes literally millions of Catholics from membership of the progressive club?
That would be solely remiss given Catholics are some of the best members. As Ipsos MORI found while fewer than a quarter (22 per cent) of the public generally describe themselves as “Old Labour”, over a third (34 per cent) of Catholics say that term best describes their political view.
But this has not stopped David Cameron spying an opportunity to make a grab for Britain’s Catholic voters by aligning ‘The Big Society’ with Catholic social teaching in a piece in The Tablet. Of course the social catastrophe that awaits the poorest communities in Britain thanks to the coalition’s cuts is inimical to those very same teachings. But the fact that Mr Cameron is even trying should set alarm bells ringing.
Catholics have been a beleaguered minority within the British state for 500 years, suffering generations of privation and state-sponsored discrimination. There is a particular context to the experience of British Catholics that their mouthy critics should show more sensitivity towards.
These rhetorical attacks are violent, intimidating and provide a “dog whistle” for those whose objection to Catholicism will not be expressed intellectually. We are no more than one generation on from noxious, open, anti-Catholic bigotry. Once it came from reactionaries and Protestant fundamentalists. Now, alas, it comes wearing ‘liberal’ clothing.
Christopher Caldwell puts it well in today’s Financial Times:
“Most of the Pope’s detractors will admit that there is an old, embarrassing kind of “bad” anti-Catholicism, based on prejudice, ignorance and nationalism. They claim to represent instead a ‘good’ kind of protest, based on ethics and evidence. The distinction is not always obvious.”
If some on the liberal left have a problem with the Catholic Church then there must be an agreement to disagree. So-called liberals need to “walk the talk” on liberalism and park the violent rhetoric. My appeal to fellow progressives is not to make the incalculable, historic mistake of pushing Catholics out of the club.
46 Responses to “Beware of pushing Catholics out of the progressive club”
Mike Wiltshire
RT @leftfootfwd: Beware of pushing Catholics out of the progressive club: http://bit.ly/czTGhd
Brian
so it is ok to cove rup the rape of young boys?
Matthew
@Ash I totally agree. I’m not convinced the author actually knows what a secular society strives to achieve. See e.g. http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/sep/18/secularist-manifesto-secularism
There are certainly bigots on both sides. I marched yesterday, and personally I have little respect for the inflammatory remarks by Dawkins. The vast majority of people at the march have no problem with religion, Catholic or otherwise, and a large number were themselves religious. They have more of a problem with the policies and behaviour of the Pope.
Jonathan Todd
RT @tom_watson Let me swim against the twitter tide to say how wonderful it was to see the pope visit< Well said http://tinyurl.com/2vup5xy
Kevin Meagher
Sounds corny, but I can honestly say that many of my best friends are avowed atheists. Many are strongly motivated to change a world where, as they see it, there will be no social justice except for what we make in this life. I respect that.
But that is not what the Protest the Pope movement has been about. Their mission is the denigration of the Pope, Catholics, Christians and organised religion in that order. I just wish PtPs apologists would be honest about their true intentions.
But an attack on the Pope is an attack on the Catholic Church and all its adherents. We are symbiotic. And if I were a Catholic critic (and, mostly, they number professional God-haters and their fellow travellers) I would be worried about the rather distasteful sight of a bunch of well-educated, middle-class white men (Dawkins, Fry, Grayling etc) hectoring and sneering at the Irish, Polish, African and Asian immigrants that overwhelming populate the Catholic Church in Britain.
There is an excellent piece in this week’s Bagehot column in The Economist that reprises some of this country’s ugly anti-Catholic history. Understanding this context is crucial to getting why ordinary Catholics like me are so angered by these vicious attacks and insults and why the Pope’s visit has drawn such overwhelming support, not only from the Catholic laity and wider Christian family, but from those who yearn to be part of more than our often selfish, reductive and acquisitive culture.
Daffyd – when the abominable Mr Dawkins refers to the spiritual leader of 1.2bn people as “a leering old villain in a frock” then I think “secular jihadist” is a rather gentle insult in reply. Actually, like Ian Paisley, people like me would rather miss Dawkins if he was not there. He’s a busted flush. An angry little cartoon character whose vanity, hubris and lack of proportion undermine his own arguments. Keep up the good work Dickie!
Instead of his silly atheist summer camps, perhaps Mr Dawkins could use his wealth and time to establish an AIDS clinic in South Africa? Or perhaps the millionaire Stephen Fry could donate the proceeds of his latest book to help flood victims in Pakistan? Like British Catholics. Unlike our many unworthy critics, we Catholics hold our convictions in deed as much as in word.
I bet our critics wish they could say the same. Saturday’s rather anaemic PtP parade was an embarrassingly puny effort from those arguing that the advance of anti-belief is absolute. (The broadcasters hardly bothered with it; the uplifting Hyde Park prayer vigil made objectively better telly).
Ash – your critique is partial, but you make a fair point about the often unwelcoming stance towards gay people. The ‘dignity of the human person’, must always be paramount. Unfortunately it is often drowned out in nosier and less generous debate.
But this serves to illustrate that both politics and belief are complicated. I am a Catholic. I am also a progressive. The former informs the latter. To those struggling to understand or accept this ‘contradiction’ then my message is “too bad”. We Catholics are paid-up members of the progressive club. And we are not being forced out by anyone.