American Atheist Magazine Oct 1979
American Atheist Magazine Oct 1979
American Atheist Magazine Oct 1979
I.
l*
<,
-."
c\.f
~J
.2
AmericanAtheist
Vol. 21, No. 10
October, 1979
articles
EDITOR-IN-CHIEF
Dr. Madalyn Murray O'Hair
MANAGING EDITOR
Jon Garth Murray
ASSIST ANT EDITOR
G. Richard Bozarth
READING EDITOR
Barry Cashman
NON-RESIDENTIAL STAFF
Bill Baird
Angeline Bennett
Wells Culver
Conrad Goeringer
Connie Perozino
Ignatz Sahula-Dycke
Elaine Stansfield
Gerald Tholen
The American Atheist magazine is
published monthly by American Atheists, located at 2210 Hancock Drive,
Austin, Texas, 78756, a non-profit,
non-political,
educational. organization. Mailing address: P.O. Box 2117,
Austin, TX, 78768. Copyright e 1979
by Society of Separationists,
Inc.
Subscription rates: $20.00 per year.
Manuscripts submitted must be typed,
double-spaced and accompanied by a
stamped, self-addressed envelope. The
editors assume no responsibility for
unsolicited manuscripts.
The American Atheist magazine is
indexed in:
MONTHLY PERIODICAL INDEX.
9
10
15
18
25
28
features
Editorial - Jon G. Murray - Goals
Letters to The Editor
;
Atheist News
Wojtyla - Go Home!
"
You Win Some - You Lose Some
It Ain't Fair .. '
Prayers Get The Boot
Film Review - Elaine Stansfield - The Wicker Man
Poems
Columnists
:
Connie Perozino - Going to The Barricades
Angeline Bennett - It Could Be Verse
Gerald Tholen - The Sensationalization of Brainwashing
Ignatz Sahula-Dycke-Catalyst
for World Liberation-Africa?
G. Richard Bozarth - The Atheist Letters, 5
Lonely Atheists
Roots of Atheism - Joseph McCabe, Part I
American Atheist Radio Series
Madalyn Murray O'Hair - Solicitation
Book Review - Ruins of Empire
2
3
5
6
7
8
39
13
.
:"14
21
30
. 33
37
32
22
35
40
our cover
Pope John Paul I comes to the United States.
October, 1979
Austin, Texas
'/
Page 1
Editorial
Jon G. Murray
"GOALS"
Looking at the American Atheist movement today, one
would think that American Atheists was but one organization
in a succession of groups each building upon the' victories of
the former. That is, however, not the case. The history of
"Freethought"
movements in the United States has been
one of disorganization. A group here and a group there, often
with mediocre leadership and always rent with internal schisms
over "policy" matters. Each little enclave of Freethinkers (or
\whateve~ nomenclature they cared to apply to themselves)
worked mdependently for some small redress for a particular
grievance. The majority of these grievances were violations in
the Constitutional doctrine of separation of state and church.
Tp.~ entire notion of, coming out directly against God or
religious teaching was a bit too much for early groups.
We have now, with American Atheists, become more outspoken in identifying ourselves as Atheists, but have we gained
ground on the separation issues that these diverse groups have
labored for for so long? The answer is no. If anything we are
~orse off today. Though better organized, we have still failed
to .accomplish some of the fundamental repairs required to
keep the wall of separation of state and church from crumbling.
Page 2
October, 1979
American Atheist
Letters
toThe
Editors
r--------jjk~J
Dear Editor,
Our feelings on procedures that
might be possible now are the following: (1) Refile the claim in another
district court (2) While waiting for
the case to again reach the Supreme
Court, American Atheists should enter
into a unified program of peaceful protest against the religious motto, by
means of "willful obliteration"
of
same, on all currency passing through
their hands. A starting, or kickoff,
date should be set, with all chapters
and individuals notified so publicity
can be prearranged -letters to the editor, newspaper notices, ads, radio and
TV publicity wherever possible heralding the program. Each chapter
can devise the emphasis it feels necessary to promote.
Enclosed is my check in the a0
Austin, Texas
October, 1979
:IS!
Dear Editor,
As an American Atheist, I am opposed to the national motto "In God
We Trust", and I vote for the first
alternative which you have listed, that
is, to refile in another federal district.
I recommend that we try a district
in the northern section of the country,
as the chances of winning in the lower
court are higher. Everyone knows that
"Bible Belt" judges are more likely to
be influenced by their religious bias
from within and also from their social
peers. I feel that, two years may give
us enough time to publicize the case
Page 3
Page 4
October, 1979
More
Reader
COlDlDent
that offends their religious conviction,
why can't Atheists do the same on
another government medium, money,
for the same reasons?; (4) It would not
be worthwhile to try to make E Pluribus Unum an Atheist slogan, because
few people outside our organization
would understand or even listen to our
explanation for doing so. The general
public would not see the connection
to the motto on the currency. It
would be a futile, not worthwhile, useless gesture; (5) So of the four possible
paths to follow since the High Court
denied a hearing, (1) and (3) are the
ones to travel.vwith (1) being the most
important and likely to bear success.
I hope that my reasoning and
advice on this matter will be of help
to you all in deciding how to lead our
organization at this particular time. I
am, as ever, a loyal and active member.
Andrew Lutes
Kentucky
P.S. I have enclosed a book order
as well, as you all will need money
for whatever you decide to do. A.L.
Dear Editor,
_
I am not surprised 'that you lost
your case to remove "In God We Trust"
off the money. It is logical that most
religious people would want that
phrase on money since money really is
their god and it is in what they trust,
fight for, and live for.
Hulda Pelzl
Illinois
Dear-Editor,
About the suit to have "In God We
Trust" removed from our money, I
say take the case to the Human Rights
Commission of the U.N. If we still
don't get the results we want, then
refile the case in another federal district court.
Arthur Fliney
Michigan
American Atheists,
About the Pope coming to the
U.S.A.just another imported Polish ham,
Gion Zatilla
New York
American Atheist
NEWS
The news is chosen to demonstrate, month after month, the dead reactionary hand of religion. It dictates your habits, sexual conduct, fainil
size. It censures cinema, theater, television, even education. It dictates life values and lifestyle. Religion is politics and, always, the most authori .
tarianand reactionary politics. We editorialize our news to emphasize this thesis. Unlike any other magazine or newspaper in the United States
we are honest enough to admit it.
Wo;tyla
- GoHomel
If the Pope, or any other head of state, desires to visit the United States, that is their business - and the business
of the United States government, as the host. If the Pope wants to use federally or state owned land or buildings to
conduct religious services, that is our business. We, as a people, cannot permit the abuse of our own Constitution
which protects a principle upon which our nation was founded - separation of state and church.
Upon notification that the Pope was to visit, certain of our political entities began to
plan for religious services, specifically for a Papal mass to be said, under the auspices and
with the approval and aid of the government. Boston planned to erect a podium, at a cost
of $100,000, in the city-owned Boston Commons. The Washington Mall accommodations
are calculated to cost well over $500,000.
It is obvious that this is an impermissible admixture of religion
and government and should not be allowed. The Roman Catholic
church owns real estate in excess of $162 billion in the United
States. It has a string of magnificent cathedrals where Roman.
Catholic masses could be said. The Maryknoll properties throughout the New England and New York area exceed thousands of
acres. There is simply no need for the United States or any state,
county or city government of our nation to accommodate for a
"Papal mass" at tax payer cost.
American Atheists are, therefore, at
the time of the printing of this issue of
the magazine, seeking legal action to
stop this infamous activity.
Austin, Texas
October, 1979
Page 5
NEWS
Page 6
October, 1979 .
~/
American Atheist
NEWS
It Ain't Fair!
Each year the Lions Club of Kentucky sponsors a Blue
Grass Fair in Lexington and exhibit booths have been freely
given to Baptists, Methodists, Quakers and Mormons. Yet, in
May, when the Kentucky Chapter of American Atheists applied for such a booth, the request was denied. The fair's executive director proclaimed: "We feel a responsibility to our fair
patrons. Any group or organization we feel would be controversial ... we don't put them in. We don't feel that the fair is
a platform for any group to express controversial ideas."
The fair, scheduled to open in late July featured about 100
commercial exhibits and usually drew about 80,000 patrons.
The Kentucky Chapter Director, John Crump, offered to permit the Lions to select which pieces of its panoply of literature
would be approved for distribution. The offer failed.
The fair is staged each year at Masterson's Station Park, a
public facility, on a yearly contract. The staff attorney inthe
local government's law department, trembling, announced,
"At this point, we really don't want to get involved in it."
Crump, a devout state/church separationist, then complained to the local I.R.S. to see if the Lions Club was violating guidelines on impartiality by prohibiting a non-profit,
educational, tax-exempt organization from exhibiting, and
charged the Lions with discrimination on the basis of religious
belief.
When all moves for assistance in the matter had been exhausted, Mother Nature moved in with some help. Beginning
July 20th and continuing through July 28th, there was rain in
Lexington, Kentucky every day of the fair.
The Lions Club increased its promotional efforts significantly and hoped for an attendance of 110,000. That fell to
67,000 and after deducting all costs, the Lions found that this
year, for the first time, the group lost money on its venture. To be exact it came out in the red slightly over $15,000
in the report which it gave to the club board on August 9th.
Meanwhile, John Crump wrote a "Letter to The Editor" of
the Lexington Herald and Leader newspaper, which was featured with a picture of the raindrenched fair, complete with
umbrellas and 'a muddy midway.
He queried, tongue-in-cheek, "After all, since Atheists were
not allowed to be represented at the fair while gospel groups
sang praises to the heavens, why would God dump his water?"
Why indeed!
Meanwhile, the Utah Chapter and the Houston Chapter of
American Atheists have both been accepted by local fair
committees in their respective areas to have booths at the fall
fairs and the Arizona Chapter just concluded a very successful
fair participation, booth and all, in Tucson.
Austin, Texas
John Crump
Moral: if religious folks really believe that Atheists are in
league with Satan, it might be better for the religious zanies
not to cross them - the situation may work in reverse!
Meanwhile-back at the Kentucky AA Chapter headquarters-the indefatigable John Crump worked on. He has a habit
of charging in all directions to cover all fronts. By August, he
was able to obtain a permanent listing in the Lexington Herald
and Leader's Fayette County Record 'Help Column' for the
chapter's Dial-an-Atheist telephone number.
It is reproduced here, inaccurate spelling and all.
County.record
October, 1979
~I
Help Numbers
..~=
.255-4393
Alcoholics Anonymous
Alternatives for Women
Ambulance..
.
American Alhiests
. .... .2]6;27Q5
.255-2374
Ask Us. Inc
.
.269-6334
Birthright of Lexington .
Cancer Emergency Line .
.253-2822
.233-6333
Cancer Hopeline .
.269-6922
Catholic Social Service
Child Abuse Hotline ..
.252-1456
266-0101.
Christian Counseling.
. ... 252-7426
Citizens' Advocate ..
.252-2410
Civil Defense
Community Action (CALF). ... 254-9354
Page 7
NEWS
Italian Politics
"Normally the devout kiss my ring, but for you Seignor Morelli,
I maka the exception."
Page 8,
October, 1979
~/
American Atheist
trhose Outra,eousSuperstitions
Elaine
Stansfield
Austin, Texas
October,
1979
Page 9
On Abortion
Amedeo Amendola, Ph.D.
In view of contemporary controversies on abortion arid the different
opinions which Atheists have expressed in The American Atheist,
I would like to present an essay on
the subject.
As in the case of other historical
issues, there are three fundamental
perspectives whereby a resolution to
the ~ssue of abortion may be sought:
the theocratic, which operates according to presumed divine dispositions or laws; the aristocratic, which
operates according to the dispositions
or laws imposed by those who make
themselves lords over others; and the
humanistic, which is rational and autocratic.
[A] An example of the theocratic
perspective is offered by Catholicism,
which proclaims that the voluntary
.destruction of an innocent person is
wrong, a person being defined from
the moment a soul is created by god.
(Born and unborn innocents may die
"by accident" in a war, but this has
never been deemed a sufficient reason
for an official condemnation of war
itself.) However, since there is no
scriptural or other information as to
when god creates a soul, the theologians have had to resort to non-religious grounds to determine whether
a person exists at the moment of conception, three months later, or at
birth. Nevertheless, religionists stamp
their opinions with the seal of divine
authority.
A controversy specifically between
such religionists and Atheists cannot
exist, since they are both on non-religious grounds. Moreover, since all gods
are made in the image of man, any
specifically oracular or scriptural position on abortion will merely reflect
the tribal conditions in which the religion was born or adopted. Thus, for
the Jews, god bade men to grow and
multiply, since, in the face of the powerful Sumerian or Egyptian nations,
the Jews could only hope for safety
and power in numbers. (The god of
Israel spoke to Israel, not to the
world.)
Aristocratic Disparity
[B] Aristocrats, who are not merely the armed extension of theocrats,
operate according to the aristocratic
Page 10
October, 1979
'.American Atheist
Austin, Texas
Page 11
October, 1979
._------'-'---
Natural
Law
Universality
Page 12
of embryonic
persons as citizens
follows the general pattern of inherent
human rights which Jefferson affirmed
thus: "We hold these truths to be self
evident: that all men are created
equal; that they are endowed by their
creator with inherent and inalienable
rights; that among these are life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness ..... "
The revisers of the text eliminated "inherent," otherwise there could be no
forfeiting of life, liberty, or property.
The idea that rights exist insofar as
men create them for themselves is
naturally blasphemy, and to Puritans
and other religion-infected persons,
it would have appeared more nefarious
than the idea that rights, rather than
coming from a god, exist for commoners insofar as they are granted by
lords.
[3] Cultural universality - according to which "person" is also defined - includes the fine and useful
achievements which are common to
all men. (They are historical actualizations in contradistinction to generic
potentialities.) But what is culturally
similar in many does preclude good
differences and disparities. The disparity between parent and offspring,
teacher and pupil, etc., within the
humanistic goal of excellence (which
is exactly what confers dignity and
worth), is the very opposite of aristocratic disparity. Striving toward that
goal implies that in one way or other,
at some time or other, a person is a
(cultural) carer, a provider, an educator, one who raises others and himself.
We strive toward a better and better,
greater and greater, humankind; the
actual humankind of works (deeds
and products).
The striving in question is concrete
love. It is a love of humanity which
brings joy as well as grief. Grief, when
despite all fine, human works, there
is birth of deformed or retarded
people; mutilation or destruction 'of
worthwhile people carried out by
criminals, by unjust laws or private
decisions, by war, or by the blind
forces of nature; and either voluntary or involuntary - termination of
an embryonic human life which might
have developed into a worthwhile
human being. It is a great pity that
such things should take place.
<
October, 1979
Not Wrong
American Atheist
A MATTER OF CHOICE
The mountain sides don't interest me
Nor fields of aspen green
Th'river banks can go to hell
I love a barroom scene
I care not for some flower rare
Or geologic scar
I'd rather see th' topless dame
Who's in th'Sandfire Bar
FALSE CLAIMS
FLOWERS AT A FUNERAL
Reticence flows through the rite.
Flowers guard the casket
And remind one of a Brazilian sun,
Miniaturized, but more powerful
Than any person laughing from fear
Of fear.
Karl E. Pauli
'
Barrv Cashman
Austin, Texas
October, 1979
Page. 13
Ta~estry
COllille Pe ro z i no
Page 14
October, 1979
'.American Atheist
Austin, Texas
October, 1979
Page 15
SCHOLARSHIP
Church leaders generally .have not
encouraged scholarship except for efforts to refute independent scholars.
Bible commentaries are church oriented and are intended to put the
best interpretation on the scriptures.
The faithful are usually more concerned with strengthening their faith
than with research into its historical
foundation. They don't read independent scholarship. Non-believers are not
interested and they don't read it
either. Libraries get rid of books that
are not read. The better encyclopedias
are quite good, provided the subject
is not written by a religionist.
RADIO, TV & NEWSPAPERS
The religionist must be constantly
on guard against public criticism of religious beliefs lest the faith of the
faithful be shaken. Hence, conservative church leaders are willing to use
boycotts of news and entertainment
media to restrict unfriendly comment.
They do it and it frightens advertisers,
newspaper editors, TV and radio commentators and movie makers. The absence of public criticism of God
theories lulls people into assuming that
they help people. Many people in the
media are misled by their own media.
HOSPITALS
The Jesus Christ myth promotes
faith healing over medicine and implies
that disease is due to sin. This myth
delayed medical research in Europe by
1000 years. Many modern hospitals
owe their origin to a religious sect because, in my opinion, the humanitarian instincts in man can overcome religious doctrine. Churches often have
money, organization, influence with
legislators and the need for a good
public image. Some have low paid
celibates available, which is a competitive advantage. Hospitals can
actually be a source of church income,
so they remain under church control.
UNIVERSITIES
Seminaries are needed to train the
clergy. If these choose to grow by
teaching non-religious courses to at-
Page 16
October, 1979
POVERTY
The cure for poverty is knowledge, self-help and family limitation.
Sources of knowledge are suppressed
by dominant churches because knowledge often undermines the church
teachings. Church scriptures teach dependence on God. They do not teach
self-help. The New Testament glorified the giving of all money to the
church. The Catholic Church is against
contraception. It extends this ban to
everyone by secular law where its political strength is strong enough. Charitable efforts to feed the hungry while
blocking long term solutions have led
to hunger on a gigantic scale.
Conservative or Liberal? Conservative churches grow, liberal churches
disintegrate.
The fundamental
churches are growing in numbers,
wealth and influence. Liberalism allows people to think for themselves.
When they do so, they find they don't
need the church themselves and they
see no reason why its doctrines should
be imposed on others. So they leave
the church. Current problems of
membership and income of the Catholic Church are partly due to the liberalizing moves of Pope John 23.
CREATION
Matter has probably always existed in some form or another. If so,
it makes it unnecessary to explain the
creation of matter. Attempts to describe God and explain his method of
creation bog down in contradictions.
Explaining one mystery with another
is hardly a contribution to knowledge.
American Atheist
Evolution of Life. Present knowledge of the origin of species is incomplete .. However, the Genesis descriptions of the origins of species are obviously myth intended to show the
power of God. The two stories contradict each other. They are presented
as fact with no reservations at all. The
stories indicate a lack of understanding
of the sky and the solar system so they
could hardly be inspired by an allknowing God.
Religious Words like God, sin, salvation, spiritual need, atonement, etc.,
have a vast range of meaning. A
speaker uses them to suit the purpose
he has in mind at the moment. It is
necessary for the listener to guess at
the meaning by the way the word is
used. This is an exhausting process and
makes communication quite difficult.
In my opinion, these are nonsense
words that cannot be precisely defined
as they do not represent a realistic way
of thinking. Theology is not real
knowledge.
City
Council
~~~
~
~~(
r
#~~
r':'~I=s')l.)J
~'-
c:--.-..-:::;::-
r::;;; )_~.
II ""~ (If.~
~J::::::
I
./~
-='
IL
Ir/
Austin, Texas
October, 1979
Page 17
"Heads
I Win
- Tai 15 You Lose"
Conrad Goeringer
It happened to all of us when we
were kids, probably even Jimmy the
Greek: some older neighborhood pal
'would make a bet with you on the
flip of a quarter. "Heads I win, tails
you lose!" he would quickly say
as he tossed your two-bits skyward.
Naturally you lost. That other kid
would always win .....
Religion today is much like a tossed
coin where the rules of the game resemble the "Heads I win, tails you
lose!" scam. We Atheists, of course,
have a tendency to pick on the tails
of organized religion (more appropriately called "asses"). The tails are the
Bible-thumping, hellfire-and-brimstone
fundamentalists who make convenient
targets. The tails are "out of step"
with modern times; they preach the
evils of the flesh in a society more dedicated to the pursuit of pleasure, the
"wickedness of godless Communism"
in a liberal age, and bizarre theories of
creation, when most of us accept scientific evolution.
Tails make good targets since they
present the more grotesque and fanatical side of the religious coin. Faith
healers are inevitably tails, as are the
Sunday TV preachers berating us for
loose living, drinking, smoking, reading Playboy, or supporting abortion.
Politically' and socially, the tails are
reactionary. "Better dead than red"
or "Where would you be if your mother had had an abortion?" are Slogans
in the tails' lexicon. In the ranks of the
tails, one finds an assortment of religious ilk ranging from Billy James Hargis or some tent-evangelist to a fanatic
bombing an abortion clinic.
Being the more orthodox and reactionary wing of the religious behemoth in America, the tails do not get
along well with their more liberal
counterparts, or "heads." The heads
do not, unfortunately, get their fair
share of attention
from Atheists,
though they are more visible and better organized than the tails. The heads
are the respectable, liberal, "progressive" side of the religious coin; often
they are found mingling in movements
we Atheists may even support. Heads
sign petitions against war, oppose con-
Page 18
October, 1979
of a role in the country's socio-political system. The tails are busy implementing censorship ordinances, lobbying for the "Human Life Amendment"
and protecting blue laws, while their
heads counterparts fund liberal politicians, support welfare spending, and
lobby on behalf of illegal aliens.
Whether we as Atheists agree with
any of these positions is one thing; the
political clout of religious organizations in America, even when used on
behalf of "good" causes, is another.
A Common Perception
Neither head of this religious hydra
is apt to support, in principle, separation of government and church, let
alone taxation of religious bodies. The
"liberal" Council of Catholic Bishops,
for instance, recently announced its
opposition to de-regulation of the
radio industry, claiming that media
would become "unresponsive" to community needs. In fact, what the Bishops fear is the loss of vast chunks of
free air time now allocated under the
guise of "public service."
Heads and tails are active in causes
which will allow religion to find powerful allies, usually governments. Rarely do either conservatives or liberals
engage in activities which would weaken the power of the State. True to its
historical bent, the church seeks a
strong governmental ally. Whether the
issue is busing, pornography, or feeding the poor, the outcome - thanks to
religious agitationis more laws, regulations, and State power.
Similarly, no action taken by either
wing of the clergy is designed to weaken the grip of the religious establishment. In one Arizona town, for instance, local ministers and priests have
proposed a community obscenity review board, which churchmen will
inevitably sit on. And while hip-looking, "radical"
priests will march
and shout for more food stamps and
public relief, it will be the taxpayer
(not the church treasuries) who will
do the paying.
Both heads and tails share a common perception of human society;
American Atheist
7------m --
Austin, Texas
October, 1979
1/
[-------
- ---
T----------~\
Page 19
1.00: Order b
life .....
" It becomes imperative to
see that religious organizations and
persons are kept out of progressive
social movements.
When a priest, rabbi, nun or minister, for instance, runs for public office as a religious person, the issue of
government/church separation must be
raised. When churches speak out on
public issues, whether it is the construction of a freeway or nuclear disarmament,
Atheists should quickly
point out the sorry track record of religion in the betterment of human life.
Regardless of one's political or social
philosophy,
we are all threatened
when religious outfits, with their tax-exempt status, become active in the
public arena for any reason. Just because a campus ministry suddenly
sponsors a rock concert to attract students, or takes a position we might
personally agree with, is no reason to
put our Atheism on the back burner.
Today there is a growing tendency,
particularly in humanist and freethinker circles, to "work with progressive
churches" on behalf of social change.
Faced with declining membership and
acceptance, churches badly want a
new image, a new mask, a new PR job,
a new lease on life. To "work with
progressive churches" is merely to give
religion, and everything it stands for,
another flip of the coin. ~
~
P.O. BoX 2117, Austin, TX, 78768
~c~~
[continued
from page 9)
October, 1979
Page 20
--
'I:~
--
-_._'-
---------
-'
"w a r t s.1"
we asked ...
American Atheist
--'--'.--.--------------_-------.l-----l
Connie
[continued
Perozino
CfJouid f!JJeUi6e
~:;;';-"l1~~,::;.<.~!9t,,~y..wI\"';j~""'~'i~f"~~i?
Angeline
Holy Slavery
Their counterfeit rhetoric aside, the Roman Catholic
Church is determined to outlaw legalized abortion in America
at any cost, and given the unlimited tax free monies available
to that totalitarian goal, I fear they might succeed. If we are to
circumvent such an unjust conclusion, we must locate its
Ac hill
i th e fiman cia
. I empires
"
I es 'h ee,I w h'IC h WI'II b e f oun d m
it IS
building by virtue of its tax exempt status, and apply the fatal
arrow there.
Concerned Americans must begin organizing to bring pres-S
sure upon elected officials (those whose seats were not bought
and paid for with the tax free dollars of the religionists) to
stop the legalized rape of our economy, which is achieved
through religion's tax-exempt position. We can beat them at
their own game by not voting for any candidate who struts
.....
Bennett
.\
~
~
!:'t
-1,l~'
.~
1J1.~'...'
.~
I'
f,Jf
i:r:.:
""
~
'.
~
S:OadtaesymaeSno~ot_V:veo,i'ctsedsOUUrngd"n-g-
So bas,'cally conditions
;S
that have
poor, and
powerless
be equally
3t
:~;.~
I~
I~.
stay
.
:~'
:~
:&
L---,
"J.':.
I.
times.
--.J
'!~:~DecelDber
~{;.,
Austin, Texas
October, 1979
'l
Page 21
t
S
B
O
of theism
-Jo,"phM,C,b,
Joseph
.
McCabe
[Unless otherwise indicated, all quotes are from JosephMcCabe's 80 Years a Rebel and Twelve Years In a Monastery.}
In his paean, Joseph McCabe: Fighter for Freethougtit."
Isaac Goldberg wrote: "Had Haldeman-Julius done nothing
else than to make the writings of Joseph McC~be accessible to
the poorest reader, he would have earned his title as one of
the more important of the educators in this country." This
1936 statement stands unchallenged today. Rarely has Atheism had a more valiant fighter than Joseph McCabe; rarer still
one more universally educated.
The adjective in America is Jeffersonian. Like that more
famous freethinking skeptic, McCabe was an enemy of every
form of tyranny over the human mind, and he never would
have argued with Jefferson that the true secret of human happiness lay in possessing the rights to "life, liberty, and the
pursuit of happiness." Also like Jefferson, McCabe had a hunger to know everything, and in his long life, he did his best to
satisfy that hunger. Jefferson awed his contemporaries with
the range of his learning; McCabe would have awed Jefferson.
In his autobiography, McCabe stated that the acquisition
of knowledge was the main pleasure in his life. It was not a
selfish acquisition to enable him to sneer down at the masses.
McCabe could never have taken pleasure from such a mean
goal. The pleasure of scholarship came from his uses of it.
Knowledge armed him formidably to become an "almost
gay fighter against powerful evil." The manner in which he
used his weapon was "to stimulate men to think and to
teach them such facts as, in my conviction, will help them in
their search for the way to a social order without wars, poverty, blunders, and cruelties that disgrace what we call our civilization."
Without, too, religion. The former Franciscan monk
claimed his creed was: "Consistency is the virtue of cowards."
Yet, once he quit the Roman church, he never wavered in his
opinion, backed up by hard, cold, damning facts, that religion
in general and the Roman church in particular were evils to
be, as Voltaire had declared, crushed. When he finally resolved that Agnosticism was intellectual hypocrisy, he never
wavered in his firm, militant commitment to Atheism despite
what that commitment cost him.
His real creed is expressed in the simple epitaph he asked
for in his autobiography at age 79: "He was a rebel to his last
day. "
In his life he wrote, in longhand, over 200 books ranging
from the slim Little Blue Books to the 450,000-word Rationalist Encyclopedia. He delivered so many lectures in 50 years
after leaving the clergy he could only estimate the number, at
Page 22
October, 1979
American Atheist
Roots of Atheism
Austin, Texas
One wonders why they did not begin to question why their
god of Catholic fertility never bothered to insure a rise of income to feed the new mouths lie "blessed" them with. The
family, now eight "in number, had to move into a four-room
house in one of the poorer West Gorton rows. One room they
used as a shop where they sold "a variety of things from beer
to bacon and potatoes."
At 12 McCabe became a productive member of the family.
He learned to cut bacon and cheese and butter. He learned to
deal with butchers and egg-sellers in the market. "The work
lodged in my memory impressions that are part of the fuel
of my rebellion."
West Gorton made a socialist of McCabe, and his memories
of that place kept him a believer in the socialist promise when
he became prosperous enough to be a bourgeois. This important aspect of Joseph McCabe's philosophical development
can only be understood by a detailed picture of the social
environment in which he grew up. It is a picture that McCabe
at 79, when he painted it in painful words, still found "ghastly." His description cannot be improved upon:
"For the majority life benumbed the mind; for a large number it was brutalizing, We McCabes were not counted poor,
but eight of us lived in a four-room house, and one room was
the shop. Fifty families lived in the remaining dirty brickboxes with slate roofs of the row or block. It was back to
back, separated by a narrow passage, with the row of larger
houses, and the privy of each was at the bottom of the small
flagged yard - an open muck-heap.
"There was, except in the monastery and the house of the
Protestant minister, not a bath or a water closet in a square
mile of congested houses. The stench in summer was appalling,
and funerals were as common as stealthy removals by night or
'moonlight flits.' Yet all around us was an acreage of real poverty, sinking in places to a level at which life was close to that
of the brute. I knew boys from these areas. They were thieves
at eight and rapers of girls at 14. I have known them crowd
round in excitement when a man coupled with a sow.
"Fighting and copulation were the outstanding pleasures of
life, the only pleasure for which they" paid nothing. At 12,
usually, the boy or girl entered a shop or factory, and there
was commonly, at the end of the first day, a ceremony of
initiation, for boy or girl, churchgoer or not, that I need not
describe. From that day their ears were drenched with obscene
talk.
"On Saturday they saw their elders flock to the squalid
public houses, and by evening the streets were enlivened with
group-fights. The men wore thick leather belts, and they
usually strung several heavy, brass buckles on them. In their
fights they wrapped the leather around their hands and used
the brass-weighted end. Many a time I saw some drunken,
grey-headed woman reel out of the fight with a bloody head.
"Our corner shop was a social observatory from which,
across a waste space or sea of mud after rain, we could not but
see the life of the poorer streets. The one or two police - to
tens <of thousands of these folk - rarely intervened, but I have
seen my father, in white apron and broad-brimmed, whitestraw hat, push his way into a group, though he had neither
the physique nor the temper of a fighter, and drag them apart.
"Before six in the morning the paid 'knocker-up' went
round the streets and beat on the windows of the bedrooms
with a bunch of wire at the "top of a long pole. In ten minutes
or so, for they slept in their day shirts (in which the almost
October, 1979
Page 23
universal bugs and lice were rarely disturbed) and did not wash
or shave or get even a cup of tea, they-roused the street with
the clatter of their clogs (heavy shoeswith iron-shod wooden
soles, which all wore)."
"The trickles of men and girls, their breakfasts and dinners
(bread and cheese or a little bacon or meat - there was no interval for tea) carried in knotted, large, red or other colored
and grimy handkerchiefs, blended in the La,ne, our chief street,
and a grim procession, looking, on the bleak winter mornings,
like a march of the damned, thundered its way to the mills,
a mile or two away, to make the fortunes of the great cottonspinners and merchants and to build up England's greatness.
"The older folk told them how they had once worked 14
to 15 hours a day. Now Parliament had, after a fierce fight, for
it was un-English to interfere with Free Enterprise, given them
a ten hour day. They reached home after those strenuous
hours in a fetid atmosphere, and no man then knew or cared
to know how many calories to eat, about six or seven in the
evening.
"What concern for our 'spiritual realities' would you expect? After paying for what food they could on Saturdays
and for indispensable clothes and shoes they drank what remained of the wage. On Monday morning the wife pawned
the Sunday clothes of the family, but there was nothing to
do with the money except buy more beer and food. Not one
adult in four could read, and the fourth had as a rule little
inclination.
"Few of them ever went five miles from their ant-hill. The
only shows were a tawdry circus that pitched its tent on our
waste ground once a year and a still more tawdry and entirely
vicious four-cent theater, 'Simpson's Slang,' that brightened
the district every few months with its naphtha lamps and lewd
jokes. The 'respectable,' like my father, took their children
(walking, for cents had to be counted) occasionally to the
city museum, three miles away, and once a year to the pantomime at the city the~ter or to the Zoological Garden. Drink,
fighting (as participants or spectators), and sex were the pleasures of life."
It is easy enough to comprehend why McCabe had no love
for capitalism. He came to see later that the churches conspired closely with the industrialists to defeat unionization and
keep the workers in the condition in which McCabe grew up.
McCabe took his "place in the industrial army" at 13. This
was after eight years of parochial school that imparted to him
only the ability to read and write and do arithmetic. That he
had any morals left was due entirely to his home life. Parochial
school was a pit of cruelty and crudity reflecting the neighborhood, and the heavy presence of religion did nothing to inhibit
it. Only the personal presence of a priest had any effect at all.
McCabe, though, was a bright lad and he did not begin his
working life in one of the hideous lower circles of a factory.
He got a job as an office boy - go-for would be the term used
today - at one dollar a week; easily he was in the first circle
or no lower than the second. Only the three youngest children of his family were not working, and his mother conceived
no more after the tenth member joined them. Freed from a
Catholic birthrate, the industry of the family began to lift it
out of poverty.
From errand-runner, McCabe rose quickly to clerk and the
future was bright. He worked in the merchant-house of the
millionaire John Rylands. This "prince" he saw every day and
began to have the stirrings of distinctly capitalist ambitions.
He saw himself rising to the position and income of Rylands.
This was not to be. His mother had at birth committed this
son to the priesthood, and her desires, though never fanatically
pressed upon him, -naturally were a constant pressure the boy
in the end could not resist because he loved his mother and
Page 24
October, 1979
American Atheist
gnos tIClsm
and Atheism
Joseph McCabe
AGNOSTICISM
The
Agnostic is defined by the
highest authority on the English language, Murray's (Oxford) Dictionary
(in 40 large volumes), as:
One who holds that the existence
of anything beyond and behind
material phenomena is unknown
and (as far as can be judged) unknowable, and especially that a
First Cause and an unseen world
are subjects of which we know
nothing.
With this all the best dictionaries
(Webster, Funk and Wagnall, etc.) agree, and it accords with Professor
T. H. Huxley's account of how he
came to coin the word. Julian Huxley
unduly softens the position of his
famous grandfather in a recent pamphlet when he says of him:
Most religious people, he said, are
sure that they have a solution of
the problem of existence and know
that god exists and something of
what his nature is. Huxley was sure
that he did not know and affirmed
that there were certain questions
which it was impossible to answer.
The truth is that Huxley wanted
even more anxiously to dissociate himself from Atheists than from religious
folk, and for this novel position he
found a basis in the philosophy of
David Hume. It is true that Herbert
Spencer had already written a fat volume about The Unknowable (the ultimate reality) but Huxley did not particularly like Spencer.
Half a century earlier Hume had
said that the human mind can perceive
only the material phenomena (colors,
sounds, movements, etc.) in nature
and the mental phenomena (thoughts
and emotions) in itself. If there was
any reality - god, soul, or matter behind or below or beyond these
"phenomena" it was unknowable, because the mind could see things only
through the windows of the senses.
Hence, said Huxley, neither I nor the
theist nor the Atheist can know
whether there is a god or not, and it is
no use arguing about it.
Austin, Texas
Currency
October, 1979
Page 25
ATHEISM
The same authoritative dictionaries
which define the Agnostic as one who
holds that the mind cannot even speculate as to whether there is a god or
not define the Atheist as "one who denies or disbelieves the existence of
god." The compilers of these leading
dictionaries weigh each word in their
definitions very carefully and therefore they mean - and some of them
say - that there are two kinds of
Atheists: the one who denies and the
one who, without going through the
form of denial, just does not share
the belief in god. For instance -you
may share the belief of Christians
that there was an historical Jesus,
you may say simply that it is not
proved, or you may, like some writers,
deny that there ever was such a person.
The findings of the dictionary-compilers are based upon the writings of
recognized experts, as when the American expert Professor Flint says that
"every man is an Atheist who does not
believe in god," or the leading Unitarian Dr. J. Martineau defines Atheism as "the rejection as absurd" of a
belief in god. More particularly such
definitions are based, as is natural,
upon the meaning attached to the
word by the leading writers who profess Atheism. Almost without exception they do not take the trouble
to deny the existence of god but mean
only that they have examined the arguments, found them worthless, and
have no belief in any being whom (or
which) any large body of people call
god.
The Greek derivation of the word
(a-theos) does not help. This Greek
"a" is not always "merely privative"
as some say. Acosmism, for instance,
denies the existence of a material
world. In ancient Greece, in fact, the
word was used only for those who denied or were suspected of denying the
existence of the Greek deities, so that
some German scholar has been able to
prove that there were not many Atheists there. The luxury of denying the
existence of the Olympian family was
hardly worth suicide.
In short, according to the recognized authorities an Atheist is a man
who either says' that there is no god
or simply has not himself a belief in a
god; and since it is rare for an Atheist
to indulge in denial, Atheism is, ac-
Page 26
just the
Falsehoods
Those who prefer the label Agnostic are apt to point out that, whatever
the big dictionaries say, in popular usage an Atheist means one who denies
and so they prefer to avoid the word.
I always envy the man who can treat
even the standard dictionaries in this
cavalier fashion but in. point of fact
popular usage is not consistent. If you
tell a man that you are an Atheist he
will, it is true, be very apt to say, "So
you deny the existence of god," yet
the same man will call you an Atheist
if you merely say that you have no belief. We do not usually fix the meaning
of our words on such loose authority
as this.
As a matter of fact it would be far
easier logically to prove the non-existence of god from the waste, cruelty,
evil, ugliness, etc., in nature and human history than to prove his existence from beauty and order, especially
as science now easily explains these. A
very distinguished American biologist,
Professor H. S. Jennings (The Universe
of Life, 1933) said, referring to this
subject, that the course of biological
evolution is "not the kind that would
be anticipated if life were following a
certain existing pattern, seeking a goal
already set, or being guided by an allknowing and all-powerful god." However, the way the mind normally
works is that we just examine the arguments of the believer, find them
worthless, and so do not share his belief. That is Atheism.
I enlarge upon this point because it
is so often discussed and not always
satisfactorily. There are two further
points to be noticed. I pointed out in
the section on Agnosticism how stupid it is 'to say that the Atheist's position is "merely negative," when he is
simply intimating that he does not
share one particular belief (but may
share a thousand others), and the
equally foolish, or in this case utterly
false idea that Atheists. are selfish and
not inspired to help the world along.
On the other hand the old fable
that the Atheist must necessarily
throw over the whole code of conduct and wallow in every sort of
sensual pleasure from caviar to hot
dogs or from champagne to chorines,
is too naive. For 50 years I have been
accustomed to the tremulous maid or
Y.M.C.A. youth asking me with. a
blush "why you can't do what you
like if there's no god!" As if folk, who
October, 1979
American Atheist
Austin, Texas
This is, when we take the word Atheist in its most accredited definition, the real world-situation. To the
clergy and the politicians who play up
to them it is a very unpalatable situation, and in speeches, sermons, and the
press it is totally misrepresented. It is
suggested that if there is such a. thing
as Atheism it is either the braggadocio
of a few youths and long-haired cranks
or the philosophy of gunmen, rapers,
or Nazis. This hatred and persistent
misrepresentation of the word are not
difficult to understand. The one point
on which the clergy of all denominations can unite is in hating the man
who has no religion.
But these facts and many others
given in the above work - the immense number of declarations of "no
religion"
in countries
where the
census-taker asks one's creed, the high
proportion of Atheists amongst the
greater and more influential writers
of the Nobel Prize List, etc. - show
unmistakably that the world is advancing toward a condition of general
Atheism. This opens up a fine prospect of social progress instead of the
ruin which hostile or ignorant critics
have suggested.
r,=================
October, 1979
Page 27
Satan leaned carelessly against a tall, white pillar, his attiude one of 0 en defiance. A derisive smile was intended to
Page 28
October, 1979
Eve lay on the ground, hands under her head. The sun
through the trees played over her body in streaks of light and
shadow. She 'was naked as the day she was made. Created,
that is. She hadn't been made yet.
"Adam?"
"Yeah?"
"Do you believe what God told us yesterday?"
"Which do you mean?"
"About how he created this garden and a lot more stuff
out there in six days?"
"Yeah, I guess so. He says he created us, too. If he could d
that, I guess he could do the whole bit in any length of time
he wanted."
"Adam," softly, "what was it like when you were alone
here ..... before God created me?"
Adam came over and looked down at her. "It was lonely.
Nothing but the other animals around and they couldn't
talk to me. Did I tell you ..... God made me name the whole
bunch of them? What a job. Took me days to think up that
many names. Before I was through I wished he'd done it himself. I'm glad he created you."
"Adam, doesn't it seem a little strange that God created us
in two different ways? He says he made you out of the dust
of the ground and breathed into your nose and you came to
life. I was an afterthought. It finally dawned on him that you
needed a companion and he made me out of one of your
ribs. By the way, does that place bother you where he closed
you up again? Where was I? Oh, yes .... .I'm a little pissed
off that I wasn't created like you were."
"Ssh ..... Eve..... he might hear you. You know how he
comes pussy-footing through the garden now and then. I
think he checks up on us. Probably watching to see that we
don't touch that tree of knowledge. Fat chance of us doing
that if it would make us die like he sa s. And Eve while we're
American Atheist
11
Hiaryou
F.o.u.r..............
Eve and Adam had feasted on fruits and nuts in the early
morning. There was such an abundance of everything that they
were inclined to waste a lot of it; onl~ choosing the most
choice parts of the food and tossing the rest aside. This caused
a small garbage problem and a bit of slothfulness at not having to work for a living. It was still early and they had already
gone for a swim in the river, played with the animals and
walked twice around the perimeter of their paradise. Bored
is what they were. Adam decided to stretch out on the ground
and take a nap, and Eve sat and twiddled the thumbs that
made her different from some of the other animals.
Having tired of thumb twiddling and Adam's snoring, Eve
sauntered around the garden again. Eventually she happened
in the vicinity of the tree of knowledge. Curiosity drew her
ever closer. She jumped when she heard a smooth, deep voice
say, "Hi, Kid." She looked toward the sound. He was coiled
around a limb of the tree, grinning down at her. The serpent.
"Hello. You startled me."
"Sorry, Kid. Have an apple or whatever this fruit is."
"I wouldn't dare. God says if we eat of the fruit of this
tree we shall surely die. Besides, I'm not hungry."
"OK, Kid. Some other time maybe. But don't be so naive.
Nobody dies from eating an apple ..... or whatever."
Eve left the area, but the seed of doubt had been planted.
Five"
Seven
Six
Sure enough, that evening God came walking through the
lzarden and althouzh he was omniscient and alreadv knew w.hat
Austin, Texas
October, 1979
Page 29
NATURE'S
Gerald
WAY
Tholen
The Sensalionalizalion
of Brainwashing
Sensationalism continues to be the chief means used by the
media in order to "sell" their wares to the public. So effective
has it been. that most scientifically valuable knowledge offered
by the media is often given only token space and obscure mention. "Front page" newspaper articles and "headline TV commentaries" are usually reserved for the more perverse and
socially "suggestive" type story. This method of transferring
information has even seemed to carry over into other areas.
The melting wings of Carter's Icarian political machine
cause him to spontaneously lash out at his underlings in an
attempt, like Nixon, to sensationalize a cover-up of his own
bungling. He seems to forget that it was himself who was
chiefly responsible for the positions that were held by those
individuals he now chastises. If they were indeed inept, why
attempt to stir the nation emotionally with a mass purge of
people who only work for him? I will not go into the inadequacy of his past presidential performances for they are
already well known and adequately judged by the vast majority of the people. If he had observed a real feeling of patriotism and self-respect, the proper thing to do would be resign
the office rather than lay the blame on others.
His actions can only be viewed as another "sleight of hand"
maneuver which delves into one of my pet subjects: brainwashing. You may ask, how can I make such a connection?
Let me here inform you: brainwashing is one of the most
elusive of all subject matters..
The average person "knows positively" that brainwashing
is something that only happens to other people - never themselves! The fact is that every human, indeed every creature,
experiences daily brainwashing. Technically speaking, education itself may be defined as a form of brainwashing; i.e,
(from the Random House Dictionary) "1. A method of systematically changing attitudes or altering beliefs, especially
through the use of torture, drugs, or psychological techniques.
2. Any method of controlled systematic indoctrination. 3.
An instance of treatment by such methods." Therefore, one
may say that any change of attitude or an establishment of
intellectual attitude in one's mind, at the suggestion of another, meets the criteria of brainwashing.
Page 30
Ocotber, 1979
American Atheist
Austin, Texas
ing in any capacity without giving due credit to the sole authors of "belief induced by fear" - the church! This, my
friends, covers everyone. Have you, or any of your friends,
never been approached by such infantile claims that you "will
never receive your just rewards" unless you prostrate yourself
before an appropriate "god''?
Surely Dr. Brothers could have elaborated more on the obviousness of this answer! But then, she would have alienated
those of her readers who have been pre-indoctrinated (brainwashed). In not doing so she has become a part of the human
pattern of "brainwashing" that I am trying to elucidate blame the other guys; don't associate our own acceptances
within the arena of brainwashing.
Why do such authors inadvertently support the cover-up
of a system of inappropriate education that does nothing to
solve an existing dilemma? How can society evaluate the
problems of mankind's preconceived, brainwashed existence
unless it realizes it is a product of that system? The Baptists
and the Moonies come from the same seed. The lack of factual
fundamental education.
Forgive me for these observations, Dr. Brothers, for, unlike
that famous biblical passage, I KNOW what I am doing.
October, 1979
1/
By Wells Culver
0
~
~i
,.
WELLS
Page 31
L.A. No.1
L.A. No.9
Irishman
Atheist, living alone in
Chicago, 64, 5'9", 164 lbs, retired
on social INsecurity, non-smoker, very
light drinker, never married, easy to
get along with, fond of reading,
moderate in all things, wishes to
meet unattached, female Atheist in
Chicago area, object mutual romance,
companionship, comradeship, etc.
L.A. No.3
L.A. No. 12
L.A. No.5
Friendship sought with female Atheist of small stature (about 5'2" or
less), no "clinging" relatives, free to
travel if desired. American, white
male, 5'4" tall, chunky build, nonsm'oker, non-drinker,
live in Ohio
Valley, age 67, retired research chemist. Just damn tired of living alone.
L.A. No.6
White male (English-Irish), 32 years
old, single, 6'2", 180 lbs, college education, dark brown hair, non-smoker,
mail carrier living in Kansas. Will
answer all letters from!onelY females.
L.A. No.7
Bachelor (35, 6'6", 200 lb) wishes
to meet single lady in the Corpus
Christi area with the object of matrimony.
L.A. No.8
Male research
non-smoker,
5'10!h", 170
with similar
Page 32
October, 1979
n'
Correspondence
wanted with trim
female, age 20-30. Male school teacher, age 27,6'5",235
lbs, backpacker/
mountaineer in California.
Address your reply to L.A. No.
(whatever that number may be.) Place
yow sealed envelope in a letter and
address the letter to the American
Atheist Center, P.O. Box 2117, Austin, Texas, 78768. We will see that
all replies are forwarded to the advertiser. No: identities are ever revealed; we protect you from any
harassment which might come from
your home address appearing in our
columns.
All Lonely Atheist ads can be
placed for $1 per word and run for
however long you are willing to pay
for it. The funds raised from these
ads go to help pay for the various vital activities of the American Atheist
Center.
American Atheist
ON OUR WAY
Ignatz Sahula-Dycke
Catalyst
Austin, Texas
Indians whom frenzied Christian padres forced into belief at the point of
deadly weapons.
Think what a tremendous opportunity for setting an example to the
rest of the world this multi-million
population would represent if joining
forces. Yet, if our relations with the
African nations mean something, it's
only that no one in Washington is
aware of its potentiality, and that our
educational methods are channeling
our students in another direction,
further complicated and suborned by
an American officialdom today bragging about being born-again Christians,
yet promising the electorate that
their newly-taken-up
belief won't
creep in and affect their official conduct. Only a fool could believe the
latter.
Gospel Enslavement
October, 1979
Changes
Page 33
You are Atheists. You want to meet other Atheists. You want to see what they are like. The
place to do it, the time to do it, is DETROIT IN EARLY APRIL when Atheists from both the
U.S. and abroad will convene at the Tenth Annual National Convention of American Atheists
1979 is about over and our get-together is just around the corner. Plan for it NOW by writing for
details from:
Helen Weaver, Convention Coordinator
Detroit Chapter, American Atheists,
P.O.B. 37056
Oak Park, Michigan 48237
Page 34
October, 1979
American Atheist
KTBC ...
Nacogdoches, TX
**********************************************
Good Evening,
This is Madalyn Murray 0 'Hair, American Atheist, back to
talk with you again.
I may be more naive than other persons, and often my husband accuses me of that, but I constantly am quite shocked by
what I find in the books I read. While I was doing research on
celibacy in the church, I ran into a shocker for me. The idea
is given in the title of "Solicitation."
Apparently the confessional has been a source of tribulation to the church since it was invented. The trouble began to
be noted particularly at the Council of Toledo in 398. It was
then that there was a canon made forbidding any familiarity
between the virgins dedicated to god and their confessors.
However, sacerdotal confession gradually became customary,
and a decretal was forged in the name of Pope Celestin I
which forbade sexual relations between women who used the
confessional and the priest who was hearing the confession.
The regulation confiscated the possessions of the female
delinquent and confined her in a monastery, while the.priest
seducer was warned of his grave sin, which amounted, in the
church, to adultery. He had to be deposed and undergo
penance for twelve years, provided always that the facts had
become known to the people in the community. This indi. cated that the scandal rather than the sin was the most dreaded by the early church.
The sin came to be known formally as solicitatio ad turpiae;
literally "to entice to vileness," or using the English equivalent
word, "solicitation."
The medieval canonists recognized that a parish priest could
become known to be addicted to this, and rules were everywhere that he forfeited his jurisdiction over his penitents who
were female, who could then seek another confessor at liberty.
St. Bonaventura actually notes that there were very few parish
priests free from this defect.
Pope Calixtus II talked of priests such as this as lions who
devoured the sheep; bears attacking a traveller who has lost,
his way; fowlers spreading lures for birds and attracting them
with sweet sounds. The pope did not treat the woman as a
partner in guilt, but as an unfortunate who found destruction
where she was seeking salvation.
It is easily understood in reading these accounts of early
history that the fault was assumed to lie exclusively with the
confessor. Savonarola, an Italian reformer who lived from
1452 to 1488, said that Italian cities were full of these wolves
in sheep clothing, who were constantly seeking to entice the
innocent with the use of their spiritual directorship. He
pointed out that immunity was virtually impossible for the
woman.
Austin, Texas
October, 1979
Page 35
mand was obeyed, but slackly. The innovation had to win its
way against the pronounced opposition of the priesthood, who
objected to its use.
In Spain, there was a hard battle. The Inquisition itself
tried to force the priests to the use of the box confessional
in 1710 through 1720, but as late as 1781, it was necessary
to issue a decree to be printed and sent to all parish priests
and superiors of convents, who were to post it in their sacristies.
One of the problems is that laymen had their jollies by getting into the box and hearing the confession of women. It
was speculated that their reasons were three:
1. From jealousy;
2. To satisfy their prurient interests; or
3. To ask indecent questions.
But in any event, this was a mechanical device to cure a
widespread and persistent evil. The big problem was how to
uncover offenders. The crime was secret and known only to
the priest confessor and the penitent. The woman was deterred
from volunteering a complaint by the notoriety which accompanied it, by the compromising of her with husband or father,
and by the enmity she might excite, particularly if the priest
denied it.
The church courts were not disposed to treat the offending
priest harshly. Not unnaturally, there was an esprit de corps of
the priesthood which led them to reject accusations which
could not be supported by witnesses, and which could be discredited by them because they were "men of god."
Things were in such a sad state in the year 1561 that Pope
Pius IV, by a bull dated 14th April of that year, gave the
inquisitor-general of Spain the power to investigate and punish
all confessor priests who solicited women for sexual intercourse when those women were in the act of confession.
The Spanish Revolution
The Jesuits caused some consternation to the church when
they insisted on trying their own on these charges, and the
cases of Sebastian Briviesca and Cristobal Trugillo were a part
of this inner conflict, as were Francisco Marcen, Francisco
Labata and Juan Lopez. The Jesuits decided to have the
trial. Pope Sextus V evoked the cases to himself. The inquisitor-general refused, and the pope had to threaten him with
deprivation of his office and his cardinalate, which finally
brought the guilty men to the pope for trial.
But the whole influence of Spain was brought to bear, and
after a prolonged struggle, in the presence of Pope Clement
VIII, in a decree issued 3 December, 1592, it was declared
that the jurisdiction of the Spanish Inquisition was exclusive
and that the superiors of the priests involved must give them
over to the inquisitor-general, but not to the pope. In all of
this, the wording of the crimes by definition was so loose
that the priests had little fear of not being able to evade the
law.
At one point, it was decreed that the crime was confined
to women only, and that it must be committed during the
very act of confession, or it was not a crime. Finally one
technicality was pressed, and this was that if the priest solicited the woman, he could then tell her that he could not
hear her confession. He could not then be charged with
solicitation during confession. Frequent and flagrant trials
indicated that often amorous endearments and incredible
indecencies were indulged, and as the confession itself was
repudiated, even if heard, this was a saving act for the priest.
Rules were interpreted in a wide range of protection for
the priest. If he embraced a woman, it was held that he was
really blessing her. Winks, nods, praises of her beauty were
Page 36
October, 1979
17
American Atheist
A JOYOUS ATHEIST
G. R icha rd Bozarth
Austin, Texas
in the San Francisco Chronicle that the Christians were getting organized to put tuition tax credits for parochial schools
on the ballot for 1980. The Reporter article was obviously
one of the opening shots of the campaign.
I naturally responded with a long argument. It should be
noted that though my letter was published in full, I was given
only the inferior forum of the "Letters to the Editor" section,
whereas the principal enjoyed the prestigious forum of guest
editorialist, and his essay was printed in giant type so that it
filled up nearly two-thirds of a page. My essay was diminished
to the tiny type used for printed letters, and filled in less than
a fifth of a page. Without equality of forum, there is no possibility that the debate was fairly conducted, or that freedom of
speech was honestly served.
Nevertheless, my argument appeared on 29 Nov., 1978.
The Charges
1. "Careful attention is given to discipline and courtesies."
2. "Many parents are seeking to find a stronger academic
program."
3. "Parents are supporting private schools in increasing
numbers as a reaction against the lunacies of bureaucracy."
4. "Private schools continue to teach morality .....
all declare that the Bible without apology or compromise speaks
to the ethical issues of our day ..... that Jesus Christ is at the
center and heart of education, and that education seeking to
be wholly secular is defective and will lead to succeeding
generations which become progressively worse and more evil."
Deryl Radder
The Answer
In the 19 Nov., 1978, "Viewpoint" you allowed Deryl
Radder full expression for his argument that parochial schools
are the "best way to go." I hope in fairness you will allow me
full expression of an opposing viewpoint .
In the first place, I agree our public school system is not
today as good as when I went through it in the 50s and 60s.
The solution is to work for the end of the "lunacies of bureaucracy" that afflict the public school system. The solution
is not to put America's youth, which means our future, into
the hands of those like Deryl Radder, whose primary goal is
to teach god in the form he imagines him to exist.
When this country was established, a wall of separation was
set up to keep state and church apart. Yet, to read Radder
is to be told that truly great humans like Jefferson, Washington, Madison, and the Adamses blundered. Well, I doubt that.
Any group of humans capable of making real the USA were
not wrong when they decided that absolute separation of
state .and church was essential to a successful creation.
Radder's main' point, however, seems to be that parochial
schools, because they teach Jesus and the Bible, are better
producers of morality. What he is saying is Christianity produces morality when "Jesus Christ is at the center and heart of
education" and the Bible is taught as relevant "to the ethical
issues today."
I fail to see how the Bible can be a source of morality for
October, 1979
~/
Page 37
Page 38
October, 1979
American Atheist
............
!
Film
Review
1'1
~ ~
elaine stansfield
~~.w~.w~
w.w.~ ~ .w.w.ww.w.w.w.w.w.
Pompous and sanctimonious he may be, but he nevertheless does not deserve the horror he now becomes embroiled
in, as it slowly becomes obvious to us that ancient Celtic
rituals of superstition are not just being practiced but are the
law of this island. Sgt. Howie decides they are all mad, but he
doggedly pursues his investigation because he has deduced the
missing-presumed-dead girl is not dead after all, but may be
Austin, Texas
The publicity blurbs for The 111-Laws starring Peter Falk state that it
is one of the funniest films the world has ever known, and that people
were falling down in the aisles from laughing so hard. Not only did no
one laugh that hard when I went, but they weren't even laughing. It is a
stupid story (that a dentist could be involved in international intrigue
because his daughter is about to marry the international agent's son)
and it is told in such a loose, improvised style one wonders if there
really ever was a script. I am not one who thinks it's fine if the actors
had a ball making the film. I want it to do something for me.
On the other hand, the blurbs for A Dream of Passionindicated to
me I would get a double bonus in a modern-day treatment of the Medea
story, in which a religious nut of a woman kills her own sons because
her husband committed adultry , and it offers Melina Mercouri discussing acting problems playing Medea, while she involves herself with the
woman in prison (Ellen Burstyn). Aside from the fact that the film
pictures Burstyn's religion as quite as cracked as she is, there is nothing
much else to recommend it. Everybody over-acts, apparently under the
impression that Medea traditionally demands it. It doesn't.
October, 1979
Page 39
Book Review
Ruins of EmDires
-
Page 40
October, 1979
staging to give expression to it, is a very learned, well-referenced, highly reasonable expostulation of the origin of religions
and the causes of their first corruptions and differences. This,
the eere of the book, covers only 65 pages. Condensed,
written in the prose of that day, depending upon the reader
having, already, a good education, it will be rough going for
any but the scholar. This is probably one of the books which
influenced Thomas Jefferson.
But when the analysis is finished, the argument must reduce
to the line of partition between the world of chimeras and that
of realities, the world of religion and the world of materialism,
i.e. Atheism.
It is at this point our deistic author goes astray, for in the
last 32 pages of the book, ignoring all of his own logic, he
embraces the god he has so thoroughly impugned in the first
176 pages. Attempting to construct a human perfect system,
he commits errors such as equating "justice" to natural law,
forgetting that nature is not tainted with either morality or
justice. The cyclone sweeps all in its path. There is no "justice" in the cancer death of a five-year-old. Nor does nature
have the attributes of pacificness or beneficience. Upon this,
Count Volney attempts to build morality, couched in terms of
(1) education, (2) moderation (or temperance) which he describes as sobriety and chastity, (3) courage, (4) activity (or
love of labor) and (5) cleanliness. Judge for yourself his rules
for a perfect society.
The Appendix contains a masterly letter of put-down
written to Christian ministers of the age and a short explanation of zodiacal signs and constellations, showing a reliance on
Godfrey Higgins, The Anacalypsis.
"The extent and variety of his information, the force of
his reason, the austerity of his manners and the noble simplicity of his character" are all discernible in Count Volney's
writings. For the scholars among you, we recommend this
thought-provoking, but difficult, book.
3rE
ON ABORTION
Amedeo
Amendola
American Atheist
by
There has never been such intolerance and persecution as Godists have practiced.
to be
o
,.....
...,
c
(],)
E
c
~
(J.)
>
o
o
(J.)
.s:
...,
c
o
...,
...,
(],)
0..
o
...,
""0
C
("j
....
(J.)
...0
Joseph McCabe
(],)
(J)
rJ)
("j
o
...,
rD
()'Q
o
o
~
...:::J
>-
...0
("j
(],)
m
(],)
0..
(],)
0..
o
(],)
0..
(J.)
..r:.
...,
o
,.....
-+-.
~
rD
rD
rD
X
rD
('")
Vl
rD