Why Dont You Blog?

(From the department of tastelessly picking on the distraught and clueless)

The ever comical Sunday Times has picked up on Kate McCann showing that, despite all the evidence of human history and the immediate evidence of the last year of her life, she still has faith…

In an article titled “‘Pray like mad,’ begs tearful Kate McCann” she apparently broke down in tears at a church and urged the congregation to pray for her daughter’s return. Now, I haven’t lived on another planet this last year, so I am aware that barely has a week gone by without something from the McCann PR Machine alternately proclaiming their innocence while begging everyone pray for the return of Maddie. It is a regular occurrence.

Despite all this, despite the prayers of almost every Christian (and lots of other faiths), despite the intercession of the Pope himself, Maddie McCann is not back.

What does this tell us? For the rational it is obvious. Prayer does not work. I am sure most sane people did not need the McCann tragedy to realise that, the evidence of cripples is a good start. The same is not true of the “faithful.” These seems to be a batch of people who will deliberately fight against the evidence of their senses. For them, a years worth of praying hasn’t worked just means “pray more” and “pray harder.” Is God deaf? Has old age made him hard of hearing? Does he have a Prayer-ometer and he only acts when it gets to a certain level?

On a more general note, maybe the McCanns just have it wrong. Millions of children die or go missing the world over. Why should God listen to their selfish whining for more prayers over the prayers of (insert random other child here)?

Still, it isn’t just their belief in magic that seems weird to the sane. Look at this:

In an interview before the anniversary the couple revealed they had been given
new hope in the search by the “massive” response to their appeal for fresh
information last week.

Their team of private investigators are combing hundreds of recorded calls and
e-mails for further leads.

Gerry said: “The lines have been overwhelmed; we’ve had to call additional
operators in.

What? Despite this massive response and huge amount of expenditure (they are approaching the financial turn over of a reasonable company now), they are no closer to catching the killer than they were a year ago. They spend more money on private eyes (and mediums but that is another story) than a normal police force. Yet they are still no closer.

Kate recently viewed footage from last year and said she could not recognise
herself.

Yeah, interesting. I wonder if coaching has anything to do with it.

The ultimate irony of this latest round of the McCann media train returns once more to poor old Robert Murat. Before you read on, remember the McCanns have a huge legal defence fund and are willing to sue at the slightest hint that they may have been involved…

Brian Kennedy, the home improvements tycoon backing the McCanns, admitted
yesterday that he flew to Portugal last November and spent an evening with
Robert Murat, apart from the McCanns the only other official suspect. A
source close to Kennedy said he was “gathering information”.

Kennedy’s lawyer, Ed Smethurst, approached Murat through a mutual friend and
said that Kennedy wanted to offer him a job.

But the job offer never transpired. Kennedy spent the evening with Murat and
his lawyers at his aunt’s house in Praia da Luz, discussing Madeleine’s
disappearance.

He left with a “flea in his ear” after being confronted over reports that
Metodo 3, the McCanns’ private investigators, had suspicions about Murat.

By Thor’s ear! The Portuguese police suspicions of the McCanns aren’t enough to avoid a court case, but a PI having “suspicions” is enough to get a rich financier to stage a fake interview so he can put a “flea in the ear” of someone who has less evidence against him than the McCanns.

Wrong. This is just plain wrong. Who said money can’t buy you justice.

Popularity: 53% [?]

Popularity: 53% [?]

There’s very interesting post on the un-biblical nature of Prayer in schools on GodBeGone.

It made me aware that I have no real understanding of what the word “prayer” means. The biblical quotation on GodBeGone suggests that it’s basically supposed to be thinking or meditating, but with reference to an invisible friend.

Well, OK, I actually relate to that, in a historical way. I can remember being four years old and speaking to my invisible friend in the airing cupboard. I don’t think I expected much of an answer, let alone thought I’d get any requests answered.

I don’t believe that meditating on the wonders of the universe counts as prayer, if you don’t direct it at an invisible friend. Otherwise, “prayer” would describe any transcendent response - e.g. to a walk in the wilderness - and would have no specific meaning at all.

Morning prayers in school involved mouthing ritual phrases and sneakily peeking around, while pretending to look down at the floor. It genuinely never occurred to the child-me that this was supposed to have a spiritual dimension. I assume the purpose was to let the teachers settle in to a day’s work and/or to teach us the patience of the queue. (That lesson didn’t take either.)

And the holding your hands in front of you in an arrow shape? (I can’t remember having to do that at school. Maybe we didn’t have to.) Why? Is it a prayer targetting device? Prayers might not reach the man in the sky if we just let them fall.

Prayer through the television and over the Internet? If prayer is targetted meditation or group membership affirmation, how are these supposed to work?

My most recent acquaintance with prayer was at an aunts’ funeral. The occasion was very moving, with beautiful, funny and affectionate speeches from her sons and grandchildren. Despite the setting - a lovely country church - the “religious” component was limited to one prayer, made by the vicar.

I watched and listened. I didn’t even understand - until my brother bizarrely congratulated me for refusing to bow my head - that I wasn’t doing the right thing. Bizarre, because I certainly wouldn’t have thought a funeral was a suitable occasion to proclaim non-belief. I would have willingly bowed my head and made the pointy hand gesture if I’d thought anyone would care. It wouldn’t have been prayer, though, or would it?

Like most non-believers, I tend to see prayer as special pleading in pursuit of a goal. Flatter the omnipotent one and he won’t smite you. If you are really obsequious, he’ll even give you thinks you want or solve your problems. Even unselfish prayers for world peace or someone else’s recovery from illness seem to depend on an idea that there’s a creature who COULD do whatever you want but is refusing until you ask nicely and say “please.” There must be more to it than that, though.

This is a serious question. I would really appreciate any sincere and non-lunatic ex-religious or currently-religious responses. Especially, about the public prayer stuff. What exactly is prayer? What does it feel like when you’ve done it successfully? Why do you do it? Are there lots of different definitions with different meaning?

Anthropology and the sociology of religion provide answers at the social level - strengthening group cohesion; magical rituals, spreading values, etc. These characterise behaviours, though, rather than what prayer means to an individual.

Popularity: 23% [?]

Popularity: 23% [?]

Obviously not. (Surely by definition alone).

Anyway, I was rooting around Technorati Tags for Christianity, and I came across a blog post titled “The Sovereignty of God and Prayer” and obviously took to it like a bull to a red rag. It is short and pretty much what you would expect from a blog taglined “Christian Resources for Young Women” (makes you want to vomit already, doesn’t it). Why do the more devout of the religious fools believers have to be so sexist?

The best bit is the first sentence: (emphasis mine)

So we believe God is sovereign and he predestines and elects those whom He will save.

Kind of makes everything else pointless. At the end there is a link to a post which “answers this” from the Ministry of John Piper (cant let the young Christian Ladies try to work things out themselves now, can we?). Sadly, this post is a complete, unadulterated non-answer.

It is long and rambling. It is full of references to irrelevant sections of the bible and it has the stormy writing style so loved by theists.

This is how it is summarised:

In other words, just as God will see to it that His Word is proclaimed as a means to saving the elect, so He will see to it that all those prayers are prayed which He has promised to respond to. I think Paul’s words in Romans 15:18 would apply equally well to his preaching and his praying ministry: “I will not presume to speak of anything except what Christ has accomplished through me, resulting in the obedience of the Gentiles.” Even our prayers are a gift from the one who “works in us that which is pleasing in his sight” (Hebrews 13:21). Oh, how grateful we should be that He has chosen us to be employed in this high service! How eager we should be to spend much time in prayer!

Says it all really.

Popularity: 20% [?]

Popularity: 20% [?]