Atheism’s Relics (in Two Senses)
Recently I attended a meeting of Atheists United. It began with personal testimonies on the atheistic lifestyle and instruction in how to evangelize people into atheism.
There was unending vitriol against Christianity in general and against Catholicism and Protestant Fundamentalism in particular. Every problem that has faced mankind can be traced back to Christians; no emotion was spared in denunciation. I was astonished at the level of hatred and hysteria exhibited by people ostensibly representing rationalism and the objectivity of science.
A “sermon” was preached on “Atheistic Evolution and the Inevitable Destruction of Belief in Creation.” Fossils were passed around as Scripture was ridiculed to shouts of “You tell ‘em!” (their equivalent of “Amen!”). One fossil was nearly dropped; the speaker nearly had a heart attack, as though it were a sacred relic.
After a final excoriation of Christianity, the proto-martyr Galileo was invoked and a final blessing was given: “Have no fear. Science (with a capital “S”) shall overcome all ignorance, superstition, and Christianity.”
The experience reminded me of a tent revival. There was something about the meeting that would have made a Fundamentalist feel at home. I felt the people took their atheism very religiously.
I took away one positive thing. I noticed that nearly everyone was at or over retirement age. Can it be that the old war-horse of rationalism has seen its day?
Terry Frazier
Fullerton, California
From Spooks to Saints
IN our neighborhood we have a different kind of Halloween. Instead of dressing as devils, witches, and goblins, children dress as angels, saints, or holy people at an “All Hallow’s Eve” party.
The mothers arranging the party made sure that books containing pictures of saints were available for their children’s use. It’s so nice to see children get excited about the saints. They go through the books until they find the one they like best this year.
With the help of a microphone, the children were glad to tell their saints’ stories. To take the place of the “trick or treats,” each child was given a bag of candy before leaving the party. This was a wonderful way for all the families to anticipate All Saints Day.
Gwen Gil
Centerville, Louisiana
Campbell Wasn’t Soupy
A member of the Church of Christ and a student of the writings of Alexander Campbell, I would like to make a friendly response to Mark Wheeler’s “Campbell’s Soupy Theology” [August 1991].
There are now three denominations resulting from the Campbell movement, but it does not follow that Campbell’s theology was “soupy” or his vision of “uniting all Christians in all the sects” was therefore wrong. It could be that he was a man ahead of his time. He may have been right even though he failed.
Mr. Wheeler does not seem to realize that it was not Campbell’s intention to start another denomination. He was very reluctant to leave first the Presbyterians, the church of his youth, and later the Baptists. He always claimed he was forced out.
Campbell always claimed to be catholic and based his plea for unity on catholic principles–not Roman or Greek Catholic, but catholic in the sense of “the one, holy, apostolic, and catholic church.” He had a way of saying to his detractors, “You can’t make a sect of us because we are catholics.” Not exactly “soupy,” I would say.
Leroy Garrett
Denton, Texas
Both Scary and Sad
I am A Lutheran by choice, having undergone an Evangelical conversion some nineteen years ago. I have been exposed to various Christian faiths through the years and consider myself ecumenical. I have been married to a Catholic woman for five years and have been studying Catholicism for six years.
I am impressed by two things: the deep spirituality of the committed and the extreme worldliness of the nominal–religious as well as lay people. I know this exists in every denomination, but it seems greater among Catholics.
It has been neat to read letters to the editor and see that others in the Catholic faith share a deep commitment to the Lord. However, it seems that few people like that can be found in this area, and it both scares and saddens me. I do believe that if Catholicism were to stress Bible reading and study that there would be fewer converts lost to the Evangelical and Fundamentalist ranks.
Kenneth W. Dahl
Ray, North Dakota
Attention Hebrew Catholics!
Some issues ago you carried a review of The Ingrafting, edited by Ronda Chervin. The review mentioned the Association of Hebrew Catholics. I would like to explain that AHC is an apostolate in and to the Church. Our mission is to end the alienation of Catholics of Jewish origin from their historical identity and vocation as Israelites through the formation of a Hebrew Catholic community juridically approved by the Holy See.
The theological rationale for our apostolate is contained in Fr. Elias Friedman’s magnum opus, Jewish Identity. Readers who are interested in our apostolate can request a sample of our newsletter by writing to AHC at P.O. Box 798, Highland, NY 12528. (We would appreciate a contribution of $1.00 toward printing and mailing costs.)
David Moss
Highland, New York
Not Guilty as Charged
Your magazine is unsympathetic to the New Age movement, but I wonder about Sandra Miesel [“The Unicorn Hunters,” August 1991].
She condemns The Unicorn in the Sanctuary, putting it in the same class as Texe Marrs’s books. Her only reason for doing that is that Randy England maligns her beloved unicorn.
Miesel says England and others “assume each sign has a simple and unchangeable meaning which carries power in and of itself.” She herself does this by refusing to admit that the unicorn has in the past century been seized by the New Age movement as a symbol of its anti-Christian agenda.
Miesel accuses England of “poor scholarship” because he often cites Dave Hunt, an anti-Catholic. But Hunt, being a Christian, obviously has some common ground with Catholicism. He is still a legitimate authority on the New Age.
Just as Hunt has become increasingly anti-Catholic in his more recent books, so does the second printing of The Unicorn in the Sanctuary contain a revised suggested reading list and a warning to readers concerning Hunt. In fact, Miesel never makes it clear what she finds objectionable in England’s book besides the fact that it admits the unicorn to be a New Age symbol.
Miesel may have good intentions, but she must realize that awareness of the New Age movement and defense against it are more important than the preservation of the unicorn as a Christian symbol.
Christopher Mirus
Nokesville, Virginia
Editor’s reply: Mr. Mirus is with Trinity Communications, publisher of The Unicorn in the Sanctuary. Trinity Communications ceased its publishing operations this summer.
Far Off the Mark
I am not familiar with any of Sandra Miesel’s targets except for Randy England’s The Unicorn in the Sanctuary. The comments in the article are so erroneous and off the mark I thought that England’s book had been confused with some other book.
The quotation about the association of the unicorn with Christ and Lucifer appears to be from a publisher’s blurb appearing on the flyleaf. The format suggests that England did not write it. Also, publishers often decide the title of a book, which may be the case here.
Contrary to Miesel, the unicorn is mentioned in the body of the text: “Some other New Age symbols are triangles, circles, the sun, crescent moon, and [five-pointed] stars . . . There are also . . . the unicorn and other mythical creatures . . .” (page 47). It is just a simple mention–no attempt to prove the unicorn as evil, as Miesel charges.
There follows [from her] an implied charge of thievery on the part of England (or at least his publisher) by saying that the cover illustration was “cribbed.” True, there is no credit for the illustration, but that is not sufficient evidence to make an accusation of theft.
Miesel charges that England “relies heavily on the writings of . . . Dave Hunt.” There are three footnotes citing Hunt out of 193 footnotes. This is less than two percent of the total. This is “heavy”? Most of the 193 footnotes refer to quotations from or discussions of the works of New Age authors and promoters.
I have read The Unicorn in the Sanctuary (subtitle: The Impact of the New Age on the Catholic Church) and found it to be a calm, fair, restrained, and well-written book which any reader could benefit from. There is nothing in it dealing with fantasy fiction, which is the theme of Miesel’s article.
James R. McMahon
Huntsville, Alabama
Sandra Miesel replies:
These two letters confirm an important theme of my article: Many Catholics have been so thoroughly stripped of their own cultural heritage that they are substituting data and methods of interpreting that data from Fundamentalist sources such as my principal targets, Texe Marrs and Joanna Michaelson. We shouldn’t automatically accept everything from “Christians” nor reject everything from “pagans.”
Dave Hunt didn’t turn anti-Catholic overnight, so The Unicorn in the Sanctuary ought to have carried cautions about him from the beginning. My 1990 edition lists seventeen books as “Recommended Reading.” Four are by Dave Hunt, two by Constance Cumby. Other authors have only one title apiece listed.
Randy England approvingly cites Hunt and Cumby as the sources of his personal concern about the New Age. They can’t be dismissed as fleeting influences on his book.
The thinness of England’s research goes far beyond his use of these two dubious authorities. He relies entirely too much on secondary sources, often of a popular nature. For instance, he summarizes a scientific hypothesis from a story in Newsweek or denounces Thomas Merton without citing any of Merton’s own books.
There’s nothing morally or legally wrong in making a pastiche of a painting done in 1782. Perhaps “cribbed” wasn’t the most felicitous choice of word for the process. But it does misappropriate a terrifying image of a horse by turning it into a unicorn–which isn’t just a horned horse–to catch the prospective buyer’s eye.
Whether author or publisher had the idea for the hostile statement which I quoted from page 4, the statement entitled “The Unicorn,” the assertion made in the statement is undocumented and false. Many centuries of positive meanings associated with the unicorn (yea, even in Catholic sanctuaries) shouldn’t be ignorantly swept away because of a contemporary New Age fad.
New Age inroads into Catholicism are indeed alarming, but we can’t combat them effectively with poor scholarship.
Amy Grant Is No theologian
I agree with what Sandra Miesel writes about the “Christian” attack on any use of fantasy. You have to understand that to a certain type of Fundamentalist even admonitions to do good and avoid evil are satanic, because they lead people away from the true faith–which, to them, is to realize that being made just is impossible, that the only justification you can hope for can be acquired only by trusting in Jesus.
“I have decided,” Amy Grant sings, “I’m gonna live like a believer, turn my back on the deceiver . . . Being good is just a fable . . . The Spirit made it clear to me that kind of life’s a lie. So forget the game of being good and your self-righteous pain.”
“Christians” aren’t the only ones who want to purge fiction of all fantasy. This is one area in which Fundamentalists and Humanists work together. In a recent issue of The Humanist, Gene Roddenberry talked about how hard he fought to keep chaplains off the Starship Enterprise. He added that the absence of clergy would be unthinkable if it hadn’t been that organized religion had died out by the time of the Federation.
Don Schenk
Allentown, Pennsylvania