Image of the week: A papal plague

As the conclave to elect a new pope gets underway, I thought it appropriate to share a good, old-fashioned, scathing, unapologetic freethought cartoon, courtesy of Rod Bradford at The Truth Seeker. This cartoon, published in 1890, was drawn by Watson Heston, frequent Truth Seeker contributor and one of the great cartoonists of the Golden Age of Freethought. If only we could have such piss and vinegar in our veins these days…

See here for my reflections following Pope Francis’s death. As an addendum to that piece, I find it funny that Francis was seen as a ‘progressive’ pope, to the consternation of Catholic reactionaries the world over, and that there is talk of cardinals teaming up to prevent the election of another progressive.

(Or should that be ‘selection’? It’s never entirely clear whether the Church really believes that popes are chosen by God rather than by politicking cardinals… If God does choose, and that’s the official position, why have a conclave at all? Why can’t God just let his will be known by bellowing a name from on high? Papal conclaves really are the most obvious of pretences: cardinals shut up in solitude to hear (or feel, or interpret, or whatever) the word of God, and white smoke to indicate that the deity has at last made up his mind—definitely no tawdry, worldly political wrangling here, it’s all magic! Anyway, if God chooses popes, then ‘progressive’ Francis was as divinely appointed as his reactionary predecessor, and conservatives were gnashing their teeth at a divine decision. The divine mind is also, it seems, very mercurial. All this is as mysterious as the doctrine of the Trinity, perhaps. But not to worry: just have faith. And/or trust in ‘sophisticated theology’.)

Because, as I explained in my reflections, Francis was not really progressive, and indeed it is almost impossible for there to be any such thing as a progressive or liberal pope. Conservative Catholics just got upset because Francis mouthed some nice-sounding words about, for example, gay people. Yes, Francis was a bit fluffier than Benedict, but did he reject the Church’s misogynistic, homophobic, authoritarian canon law—which also, let us not forget, enabled the sexual abuse of children and its cover up? No. So not to worry, reactionary Catholics: he wasn’t as bad as you thought. Your own much deeper, more fragile bigotry is exposed by your pearl-clutching at Francis’s shallow words.

Who will be the next pope? I’m tempted to answer that question with another: ‘Who cares?’ The enemy remains the same. For what it’s worth, though, I think we’ll probably get someone more similar to Benedict than to Francis, so the Church will become really, really reactionary (rather than just really reactionary) once again.