An Objectivist's Take on the Passing of the Pope

I am quoting most of this article by Lindsay Perigo here.  What I find interesting is the reduction at the end.  Rather than take this experience to its natural conclusion, that is, to allow the realization that culture owes itself to the Church, the author immediately reduces this to some strange abberation.  Her ideology kicks in and she can't even enjoy a good joke.  I'd like to see what others think.  Especially my friends in CL who can help me judge this article.

Improbably, I have even heard the most marvellous humour. The elderly Monsignor Lorenzo Albacete, a New York Times columnist, told the story of his last meeting with the Pope. It was recent, and the Pope was very ill. "You know," Albacete bravely said to his spiritual commanding officer, "everyone is getting ready for your departure. CNN have asked me to go on and say nice things about you when you die." "That’s fine," replied His Holiness, "but what makes them think I’ll die before you?" Not to be outdone, the Monsignor riposted, "Well, if I do, you can go on CNN and say nice things about me!"

Over the last two days, I have been forcefully reminded that for some of the world’s greatest architecture, sculpture, painting and music, we have the Catholic Church to thank.

Yes, we also have it to blame for some of the most shameful episodes in human history. Its doctrines remain shameful—and downright silly—to this day. But we must recognise also the awful paradox that the church of the Inquisition, the church of the persecution of Galileo and science generally, the church of sexual repression on the one hand and child molestation on the other, the church of the glorification of suffering … this institution at the same time has managed to engage and inspire what Ayn Rand called simply "the best within." Especially as embodied in John Paul II. Somehow he projected in his demeanour the quest for the highest possible. The total passion for the total height.

Therein lies both inspiration and a challenge for Objectivists. We have demonstrably failed thus far to persuade people that reason and spirituality are not mutually exclusive; that reason, indeed, is the source of authentic spirituality; that reason must continually inform spirituality; that spirituality is no less quintessential for being of this world, thisthis body, rather than some other fantasy dimension. We have inherited and passed on a revolutionary philosophy by which the world may save itself from precisely such irrationalities as religion; we have failed to create a culture to match it. Our culture has been repressive, persecutorial, joyless, prudish and downright nasty. Objectivism’s worst enemies have been … Objectivists.

We have failed in part because we have eschewed the very idea of a culture. In celebrating the "I" we have performed a kind of Anthem-in-reverse. We have become too afraid of the word "we." By dismissing anything undertaken with others as "collectivism" (ignoring the fact that real collectivism entails coercion) we have blinded ourselves to the impact we might make if we acted as a fellowship of individualists, in voluntary, life-affirming concert. (Where we have come together, as in the ARI, we have displayed the unappetising qualities listed above.)

Pope John Paul II is a salutary, sobering reminder that it’s time we changed all that.

In the west, it has been monopolised by Christianity for two thousand years. Now, we Objectivists must wrest the ground that is rightfully ours from the mystic imposters who still occupy it. The sphere of "the best within."

Read the whole article here:  The Pope, Objectivism . . . and "The Best Within"

Comments

[JACK]

Two things struck me -- First the mention of the LC priests. And that's just on a personal note as I happen to have met them what seems like yesterday but was in fact six years ago when they were still seminarians.

Stephen, is it just me, but does this objectivist use some of the very language you would expect to see from Fr. Giussani, but then allows his ideology to kick in and dictate his conclusions?

[James III]

It seems to me John Paul II proves the Glory of the Church and the Culture she produces with his love of others.

Leaving aside the flaws in objectivism, the worst critiques of this article are based on misinformation.

Also it seems that reason, for Catholics, is something different for objectivists. It almost seems as though the objectivist is reverting to a pre world war sentiment in which human reason and only human reason could solve problems. This secularzation demphasizes the dynamic role of religion in the datum of history.

The billions of people mouring John Paul II requires a fundamental reconsideration of the role religion plays in both motives and effects.

[JonathanR.]

She is right about one thing. The Objectivist's worst enemy is the Objectivist, and this author isn't doing her ideological brethren any favors with her maner of writing either.