Precisely because she loved what Catholicism could be, she could not tolerate what Catholicism had become. In a 2010 open letter to the pope, Sinéad was as unrepentant as ever. Without missing a beat from her picture-tearing days, she flat out told the pope he was a liar for pretending to be shocked by the scandal, when he had penned a letter to all Catholic bishops in the world reminding them that anyone refusing to take an oath of silence on the matter should be excommunicated. Boycotting the Church—she continued—would be the only way to force it to take responsibility, so that real healing could begin.
Speaking of one of her favorite heroines, Joan of Arc, Sinéad once said, “How you get to be a saint is you speak out against the Church, they murder you, and then a century later they make you a saint.” So, maybe there is still time for a Saint Sinéad. If not, she has my vote to become the next pope.
25 THE TRIAL OF THE ZOMBIE POPE
Nobody likes ending up in front of judge and jury being charged with serious crimes. The hero of our story, however, handled it like a pro. He didn't even move a muscle as the prosecution vilified him in every way. He didn't break a sweat, didn't tense up, and his heart rate didn't climb up at all. Few people in history ever maintained such emotional composure during a trial. The fact that he was already a corpse probably helped.
In case I forgot to mention it, he also happened to be the pope (or at least, he was when he still had a pulse). How did Pope Formosus (I swear I didn't make up the name) end up as a dead body on trial?
The year was 897 CE, and these were the days when powerful rival families battled each other to have one of their own elected as pope. Think of it as a Catholic version of The Godfather movies: intrigues, alliances, murder and dirty tricks were all fair game in this quest for the papacy. Apparently, these rivalries were so intense that they didn't end with death. So, when a certain Stephen VI became the new pope, he promptly had the body of his predecessor dug up and put on trial at the Basilica of St. John Lateran in Rome. After propping Formosus in a chair, Stephen read the charges against him: perjury, serving as bishop while a layman, and trying to usurp the papacy.
Ok, now, let's take a timeout. How does a dead man defend himself from the charges? A deacon was appointed to speak at the trial for the zombie pope, but he clearly didn't do such a good job since (surprise, surprise!) Formosus was found guilty—an outcome which only raises more questions. How exactly do you punish a corpse? What kind of sentence could you possibly impose? Sentencing him to death, in fact, may be a little redundant (I was about to say “overkill” but … ).
Stephen VI was a creative kind of guy so he had the corpse stripped of his papal clothes, had the three fingers he had used for blessings cut off, and declared all his acts invalid. As an added insult, the body was buried in a cemetery for foreigners.
But Pope Stephen quickly changed his mind. Since this episode was not quite macabre enough, Stephen ordered the body to be dug up again, tied with weights and thrown into the river.
And the story doesn't end here. Popular legends began to crop up all over Rome. The word on the streets was that the corpse of the zombie pope had emerged from the river and had begun performing miracles. Perhaps in an effort to appease the apostolic living dead, the populace staged an uprising against Stephen, who was quickly imprisoned and strangled.
The next pope, Theodore II, had a plan to fix the situation. The corpse, which presumably had stopped performing miracles and was again behaving as corpses are legitimately supposed to behave, was to be reburied with honors in St. Peter's Basilica. And so it was. A couple of different later popes annulled the verdict of the trial (and one of them in his infinite wisdom prohibited further trials of corpses … just in case someone felt compelled to try this experiment again). But since any good story needs a sequel, another pope yet (Sergius III) reaffirmed the legitimacy of the zombie trial and, according to at least one source, had Formosus dug up and put on trial again, only to finish the job by chopping his head off and giving him a second dive into the river. Apparently, Pope Sergius III knew what all good zombie killers need to know: the only sure proof way to kill a zombie is decapitation.
26 KILL THE BUDDHA
Most religions are not too keen about people comparing their sacred literature to toilet paper or inviting us to murder their founders. Just consider how the Iranian religious authority sentenced Salman Rushdie to death because of a “blasphemous” novel, or how violence and hatred immediately followed the publication of cartoons making fun of Muhammad, or how many people throughout history have been burned at the stake for not showing the proper respect to religious authorities. Examples of this kind abound enough as to easily convince us that most religions are a tad sensitive about criticisms.
In light of all this, let's take a look at this statement, “There are neither Buddhas nor Patriarchs; Bodhidharma [a legendary leader of Buddhism in China] was only an old bearded barbarian. Sakyamuni and Kasyapa, Manjusri and Samantabhadra [Buddha and some of his main disciples] are only dung-heap coolies … Nirvana and bodhi are dead stumps to tie your donkeys. The twelve divisions of the sacred teachings are only lists of ghosts, sheets of paper fit only for wiping the pus from your boils.”
Or let's try another one. “If you encounter anywhere anyone who impedes your vision, quickly get rid of them.
When you encounter a Buddha, kill the Buddha. When you encounter a Patriarch, kill the Patriarch.”
Or yet again, “Do not take the Buddha for the Ultimate … As I look at him, he is still like the hole in the privy. As to the Bodhisattvas and Arhats, they are all … chains to keep you in bondage.”
If these types of statements don't raise the blood pressure of Buddhists across the globe, I don't know what would. It seems very logical that the Buddhist world would explode in anger and quickly raise a call for the heads of those who dared to speak so disrespectfully. But this is where the story gets complicated. The author of the first quote, in fact, was Hsuan Chien, a famous Buddhist teacher from the 9th century, whereas the author of the second and third quotes was Lin Chi, one of the most influential Buddhist masters in the history of Zen in China.
If you are confused, you are probably not alone. People of different religions regularly talk trash about each other's beliefs, but why would a Buddhist say such things? In the face of so many of their contemporaries turning Buddha into an object of worship, Hsuan Chien and Lin Chi were simply reminding their audience that the goal of Buddhism is not to pray to Buddha, but to become a Buddha yourself. You don't honor Buddha—these guys reasoned—by turning his teachings into a stiff dogma. You honor him by following in his footsteps, developing your own insight and becoming enlightened through your own efforts. Buddhist teachings are but maps to guide you on your journey. Worshipping the map or its author never helped any traveler find her destination.
Buddha's own teachings, after all, emphasized independent inquiry and personal experience over doctrine and strict rules. So, in an odd kind of way, Lin Chi and Hsuan Chien's words were paying homage to Buddha. Their quarrel was not with Buddha himself, but with those Buddhists who were missing the point. Their words were a shock tactic to shake people. Excessive devotion—they believed—is an obstacle to the freedom needed to find yourself, which is the true heart of Buddhism. It's too easy to deify someone else, build altars and drop on your knees praying Buddha for salvation. Get off your ass instead—Lin Chi and Hsuan Chien argued—and work for your own salvation, since neither gods nor buddhas can do it for you.
For the sake of honesty, it's worth mentioning that Lin Chi and Hsuan Chien's radical views scandalized many Buddhists. Already back in the 9th century, other Chinese Buddhist masters were horrified by what they perceived as heresy. But whereas within many other religions this conflict would have sparked holy wars, here it was simply dismissed as a difference of opinions. And so we are left with a religion in which those inviting people to metaphorically kill their founder are as famous and respected as those who spent their lives de
voutly praying to his statues.
27 HOW TO GET MONEY AND SEX BY STARTING A RELIGIOUS CULT
Ok, girls and boys, today we'll study the blueprint to get mountains of sex and money by starting a religious cult.
Just to make sure you are suited for the job, let's go through some of the prerequisites: first, you need to be an awful human being who doesn't have the tiniest scruple about preying on the weak. In case you find this first step difficult, at the very least you need to be narcissistic and self-delusional enough as to overcome any moral restraint you may have by convincing yourself that you are not really exploiting your followers, but acting for their own good: turning them into your sex slaves is just a way to help them get over their hang ups; pushing them to donate all their wealth to you is a way to teach them to overcome attachments to the material world so they can become more spiritual …
If you can get through this, you need to have an intense personality and a commanding presence. In the cult game, personal charisma is half the battle.
No one will give you the keys to their lives if you sound like a monotone version of their third grade math teacher.
Bottom line, you need to appear exciting, and sound believable when you promise your followers that their miserable existences will be filled with miracles. Being a little crazy can also help as long as you can spin your insanity as a form of divine enlightenment that only seems crazy to the unenlightened masses. Since most followers, by definition, consider themselves unenlightened, you have a decent shot at selling this bullshit to them.
Oh, yes … bullshit. I almost forgot. Having a black belt in bullshit is probably the most important requirement of all. No matter how wild your claims, and how reality disproves them, you can be shielded by your great skill in bullshitting. Anything can be rationalized. Anything can be spun to your advantage, including failed promises and prophecies. Hell … Christianity began with the expectation that the world would end within a few years, and look how far it has gotten … You need to have an answer to every objection, and seem so sure of yourself as to make it appear that anyone not seeing the truth of your answers is obviously a moron. Since most people don't like being considered morons, they may second-guess their initial opposition, particularly if you have already recruited a few diehard followers on your side. There's strength in numbers. Mob mentality rules. The greater the number of people swallowing your bullshit as if it were gold, the greater the self-confidence required by anyone who wants to question you. “It doesn't seem right”—those on the fence may think—“but can I really be the only one who sees this? Can all these people really be wrong?” Once you get them thinking this way, expect them to be your followers before the day is over.
Being intelligent is not a strict prerequisite but it helps. Alternatively, you just need to find followers who are significantly dumber than you, which will make your job of manipulating them much easier. In either case, foster psychological dependency and use your followers’ insecurities to your benefit (incidentally, this is something that happens on a regular basis within most major organized religions, so remember you have lots of competition).
Which religion you pick is not too important. You can either argue that your message is the true version and fulfillment of an already popular religion, or you can start your own thing from scratch. There are advantages and disadvantages in each. But regardless of what you choose, you need to enlist God on your side. You can't be too moderate here. You are either God's ultimate prophet, or God Himself. Jim Jones (of Jonestown Massacre fame) proclaimed he was the reincarnation of Jesus, Gandhi, Buddha and Lenin. David Koresh more moderately only claimed to be the second coming of Jesus. And Da Free John would simply say he was “the living truth, the way of salvation, and the Eternal Master of Men.” (Mmmhhh … I wonder if this is what he put on his business card ….) It is a lot easier to convince people to part with their cash and spouses if they feel it's God who is asking for them.
Coming up with a flamboyant name may help by making you sound more exotic and out there, but it could also backfire, depending on your audience, so be careful (were there really people who took seriously a dude who called himself Da Free John?!?)
Last, but not least, it may be a good idea to create a sense of urgency. I strongly recommend predicting some cosmic apocalypse about to consume the world (except for your followers, of course) or coming up with a horrible conspiracy by some evil enemy out to get you (anyone who sounds powerful—from the devil to the U.S. government—would do). Nothing brings people together and make them more fanatical than facing some common threat.
If you follow the previous steps and play your cards right, the sky is the limit. You want multiple wives? Done. Your own private island in Fiji? No problem. Just make sure you don't run out of bullshit when some of your followers realize you have been playing them all along. Many major religions have succeeded at this, so it can be done.
28 HEIL JESUS!
Here's today's quiz: who said that the government should regard “Christianity as the foundation of our national morality, and the family as the basis of national life”? Saint Paul? The pope? Some evangelical Christian leader? Not exactly. Try Adolf Hitler …
Popular wisdom tells us that Nazism has nothing to do with religion: it was born from a purely secular worldview. If any connection with religion is made at all, it is typically to some weird reinvented form of Nordic paganism, but never to Christianity. Even though there are bits of truths in this, reality is much more complex than one would expect.
Getting inside Hitler's head is obviously a scary proposition and … let's face it … it's impossible since the guy is dead. There really is no way to know for sure what he thought. But his public track record reveals quite a few disturbing facts. Besides the detail that he grew up Catholic and at least nominally he remained Catholic until the end of his life, in his writings and speeches he paid homage to Christianity over and over again with multiple references to “eternal providence” and to the “creator of the universe.” He declared that Protestantism and Catholicism were “essential to the soul of the German people.” He added, “We hold the spiritual forces of Christianity to be indispensable elements in the moral uplift of most of the German people.” And he referred to Jesus as the “one true God” and his “Lord and Savior.” In his interpretation, Jesus was a great fighter who opposed the Jewish hierarchy. And Hitler's own job was to finish what Jesus had started (Mel Gibson probably feels the same way, but this is another story …). Granted that many Christians may have some issues with Hitler's take on Christianity, but still ….
In any case, without the assist served by nearly 2,000 years of anti-Semitic Christian theology—both Catholic and Protestant—the Final Solution would have been impossible to pull off. The genocide bandwagon would simply not have recruited enough support.
If the Church was secretly opposed to Nazism—as many people say—than they were very good at hiding it. Already in the late 1920s, the pope had struck some deals with fascist regimes across Europe. For example, in exchange for having Mussolini name Catholicism as the only official religion of the state, and give them monopoly over issues of birth, death, marriage and education, the pope had encouraged Catholics to support Italian fascism—even going so far as calling Mussolini “a man sent by Providence.” In a similar vein, the Church ended up supporting to varying degrees fascist movements in Spain, Portugal and Croatia. Graduating to making friends with the Nazis was the next logical progression. In the 1933 Concordat, the Church agreed to dismantle a German Catholic party to reduce political competition for Hitler. Both Protestant and Catholic groups regularly staged celebrations for Hitler's birthday. And to add a Catholic cherry to the Nazi cake, a German archbishop went so far as to officially bless the Fuhrer.
But wait … didn't Pope Pius XII harshly condemn Nazism? Yes … with great bravery he did this after Nazism had been defeated. While it was still powerful, Pius XII had preferred silence. Long before most everyone else knew, thi
s pope had seen hard evidence that genocide against Jews was taking place. By the latter years of the war, Jews were rounded up by SS soldiers literally within sight of the pope's windows. And yet he never even threatened to excommunicate the thousands of SS soldiers who were practicing Catholics. Speaking out against the Holocaust may have helped more people realize that the rumors were indeed true, and pushed Western nations to make it easier for Jews to migrate. But Pius XII later said he was afraid speaking out might make things worse … which brings up the obvious question: at what point during the Holocaust did the pope think things were going well? The genocide machine was already working at maximum capacity killing over 6,000 Jews a day. How exactly could have things been worse?
50 Things You're Not Supposed To Know: Religion Page 7
