Messin about in Messina

Ah Messina... what to say about Messina. From the ship it very much looked the part, a city flowing down from the hills into a busy port but before we had even set off from Belfast on this trip we'd struggled to find anything to do in Messina.

We had just one thing on the list. Watching the astronomical mechanical clock move. The rest of the things to do, if they existed, we'd hope would reveal themselves when we got there. They didn't.

I suppose I should give Messina the benefit of the doubt. To be fair we didn't see much of it, just a square mile or so. Saying that, our lack of exploring was more a symptom of having trouble finding anything interesting or fun to do. If you are fanatical about churches or boats you might be OK but other than that...

Sooooo... here is what we did.

Getting off the ship and dodging the horde of scarf sellers, it was a nice surprise to find a 13th Century Church just a stones throw from where the ship docked. Here is the Church of Santissima Annunziata dei Catalani.

We stopped for a look before making it over to the Cathedral of Messina.

And here is the Fontana di Orione outside the Cathedral in front of the clock tower.

Inside the Cathedral it was suitably cavernous, donned in the usual garnishing of symbolism and wealth but impressive never the less.

Back outside the Cathedral it was a bear pit of tour touts and swarming pushy trinket sellers. Going by a seller/tourist ratio it was probably worse than the big tourist locations like outside the Colosseum in Rome. I really didn't like the atmosphere.

It was a captive audience as everyone who wasn't selling was there to watch the mechanical parts of the clock tower move.

Move they did... a Cockerel here, a Lion there and some bell ringing. It was slow going but all the gold coloured things got where they were going in the end.

So we wandered a little out of the way to find a fridge magnet. It was something like being in a more built up Italian version of Lurgan on a Sunday morning but this was a Monday... in a city. Maybe we were just in the wrong area?

Norngirl still wasn't very mobile and a lot of Messina is up hill, plus it was raining so we then negotiated a price to go on an historical road train tour to see the other few (pretty much all religious buildings) sights in town. Yeeeeeeaaah... it never set off, they couldn't get enough people to fill it so we ended up getting our money back.

With loads of time and nothing to do we wandered back towards the boat in search of a cafe or wine bar. Down by the port we found both and also a lot of the other tourists who had been watching the clock too. First we had some local Messina beer in a cafe, it was alright like, nothing to write home about but nicely refreshing.

We then found a gelato shop almost next door that had been mentioned to us on the ship. The guy serving here was the politest and friendliest person I came in contact with in Messina. He didn't even mock my attempt to order in Italian and made me feel like it actually worked without the comfort blanket hand gesture.

Last but not least we settled down in a coffee/wine bar. Ordered Red wine, got steadily tipsy and put the world to rights whilst in view of the Church of Santissima Annunziata dei Catalani again.

And that was that, our entire trip to Messina. As days go it was nicely relaxing once we'd found the bar.

We headed back on board the cruise ship and continued our relaxing day of drinking with a sail away cocktail. From the top of the ship Messina still looked like an interesting place even if it flattered to deceive.

To see us off on our safe travels having maybe helped convert the water into wine for us was HeyZeus himself - well the Madonna della Lettera anyway.

As for ever going back. I'd still like to see Mount Etna so having to travel through that part of the world again might not be out of the realms of possibility, however, if I did, I probably wouldn't hang around in Messina. At most it would be a comfort stop for the all the healthy things like ice cream and local wine.

Popes and Fears

Retrospect is a great thing and in terms of the Pope's visit to the UK, its something that has raised quite a few questions in this neck of the universe.

The first few questions were obvious, they were raised well before the Pope had even landed and before we knew what exactly we were going to receive. The main theme was the questioning of sanctioning the Popes visit as a state visit which meant the UK tax payer paid a high price for his visit. Saying that, the pastoral events were being paid for by the Vatican through charging for tickets to those events however ticket sales were apparently slow so maybe it cost the Vatican a little too?

Just on a side note whilst talking of cost, the government departments paying out of their budget amazingly included the Department for Education (maybe for the 'Catholic' school children who undoubtedly had a say in their beliefs), the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (ermmm why?) and the Department for Energy and Climate Change (What the!?).

When the Pope did land and the visit got underway way he took to the stage and offered a hand of friendship. In my post from the time entitled 'Has the Pope forgotten the golden rule?' I asked; "a hand of friendship to whom?" With retrospect, the answer appeared to have been only to members of other faith groups and the political elite. In essence just those the Church wishes to keep onside. The liberal faithful, the secular of any religion or lack of and those without a faith based belief system were made out to be the villains of society. Sadly this is understandable given the Popes viewpoint, summed up quite elloquently in the Popes own words:

"We recognise that the church is called to be inclusive, yet never at the expense of Christian truth."

Or to put it in other terms the Church will continue to preach what would be described as Christian truths and values, which includes tolerance, but yet be intolerant or alienate/preach hate towards people because of other 'truths', which in reality are determined by a council of human beings interpreting a text full of gnomic verses and accounts. A truth strongly influenced by a book that it is reported even the Catholic Church hierarchy no longer swears by. Obviously one of the other aspects to the development of the Christian faith is the tradition that has evolved through people and society over time, and the sad truth to a fundamentalist like the Pope is that those aspects have grown to become more tolerant but what does the Pope really expect?

Within that changing society, it seems there is one thing the advisor's of the Pontiff have been taking their time to consider, religious marketing, for as well as playing their age old political game, the method of spreading ideas and belief in society has changed radically through the fast paced technological advancement and the refining of commercial marketing methodology.  Here is a rather interesting blog post about the subject of religious marketing written in 2005 by a religious individual who delves into the pros, cons and possibilities of religious marketing.

The main focus of the Pope's visit though were the big keynote speeches and they were quite refined with clearly well thought through wording, but if there is one thing that was underestimated it was the public and press's ability to pick things apart and question what we're being told. The over the top focus on the non-religious in what is meant to be a secular state (except for the spiritual peers called the Lords Spiritual, in the House of Lords) will likely only have pleased and comforted the converted. In fact, the debate which followed seems to have opened up the church to more scrutiny than it might like.

Whether it was the protests against the Popes visit and his leadership's desire to stick to what I would describe as unethical truths such as not allowing the use of condoms to protect against aids or the Vatican's view of anything or anyone non-heterosexual. Or whether it is the dialogue entered into afterwards such as Evan Harris in the Guardian who put forward his personal secular manifesto to lay to rest any misconceptions the Pope tried to assign in his state funded rants. Or even the odd lack of action given the words of "deep sorrow" regarding the child abuse scandal's within his organisation. It brought it all to the fore.

Personally, I just want to be able to live my life in a peace loving, fair and ethically sound society which values equality and tolerance of anyone's beliefs which do not break the law. A secular law which defends the rights of religious organisations and individuals and their beliefs but a law free of any one religions prejudice or favouritism, a law which takes human values from the depths of human knowledge and understanding as its foundation. Sadly the Pope would appear to see this as some aggressive this or extremist that, else he wouldn't have said what he did.

As Dave Gorman asked, "when people say 'Christian Values' " as the this Pope and previous Popes have made reference to, "do they mean values which are peculiar to Christians. And if so, what are they?"
Dave hinted that in his view these are just 'Human values' and that is the opinion I also share. If there are values specific to Christianity that persons of other religions or no religion should be forced to live by or under the influence of, then maybe someone like the Pope should tell us why - without reverting back to 'because it is' or 'because I said so' or 'because it is what I was told' or 'because it Gods way'. If they really are values of the one true faith that humanity doesn't already posses at large then they shouldn't be that hard to back up.

The political nature of the visit seemed to be reflected through the language used and the choice of those praised and those the Pontiffs words attacked. The Pope spoke of an "aggressive secularism" but in reality secularism is no threat to institutionalised religion and personal belief other than to weed out intolerance and hate which in all honesty should lead to public life being led closer to the golden rules of the values deeply entwined in most religions including his own. One thing I do know, Human values do include Christian values and the Pope need not fear other than for his organisations power granted to him by a human council rather than a Godly being (unless the College of Cardinals are hiding something).

The only thing "aggressive secularism" will damage is the influence in the halls of power in States other than his own which the church historically holds, well, that and the hurt it might personally cause members of many churches but especially the Pope due to his openly aired belief that its his job to save us from being doomed to punishment in an afterlife... even if you say no thanks. As proven by his willingness to dictate to others even if it leads to a contradiction in his faiths teachings and by proxy had led people (through fear) to act in ways which could kill them way before their time or destroy their hopes of happiness which don't impact on anyone else.

I hope the Pope does come back to the UK, and maybe he'll also come to Ireland soon. After all, freedom of speech (which I'm sure we wouldn't all enjoy in the same way inside Vatican City) opens up people and organisations to scrutiny. On the plus side his visit did seem to bring some comfort to those who have been brought up or chosen to live or following Christian or more specifically Roman Catholic beliefs and it has opened up further dialogue (obviously not with the Pope) but between people who live in the UK. Though I don't see the reasoning for the excessive cost (given people still live in poverty in the UK and the current financial climate) the visit did go a little way to bring into focus to the wider public's conscious a debate which will undoubtedly grow much larger in years to come.

Has the Pope forgotten the golden rule?

Two of Northern Ireland's favourite people got together today (at a nice cost to the tax payer), the Pope and the Queen, two figure heads of religious institutions on a 'state' visit... and before long there was the Pope slagging our somewhat secular state and many people in it, the Queen being diplomatic bigged him up anyway. Today was the start of Popefest 2010 and I wasn't going to comment on it but whoever writes the Pope's speeches needs to be fired because the hand of friendship we've been offered seems to be only to his followers or other religious persons and as a tax payer and licence fee payer from my point of view it looks like I'm paying to be insulted. Hrmmm... and not just one but two insults from the pontiffs own mouth and this is only the first day!

The visit of the Pope to the UK does seem to be providing a sound byte glimpse into the real marketing campaign behind the brand smile and waves we see on TV, seemingly media training isn't able to overhaul sending an intolerant brand spokesman who is feeling threatened by a simpler and less restrictive product, aka reason. You don't need to look far into the Pope's speech to see there has been a realisation within the church that they are worried that people have realised what has been known for millennia, that ethics and morals can be found within the individual and are not based solely within participation in an institutionalised belief system.

In an opening exchange, the BBC reports that The Queen said the visit was an opportunity to "deepen the relationship" between Catholicism and the Churches of England and Scotland and also managed to praise the Catholic Church's special contribution to helping the poorest and most vulnerable around the world.

It seems like a suspiciously glowing reference from one leader of an institution that is above the democratic process to another institution which profits heavily in political sway and in the long run financially through its work with the poor and vulnerable. This might be forgiveable if it wasn't for the track record of the Church founded by a guy who never even met Jesus! Since there is a track record though, there are further questions the Catholic Church will likely never intentionally answer so I can only try and read into it.

In order to explain, take a multinational corporation, they could (and do) invest in similar projects for sililar reasons in the third world and they and the Church are not that far apart as entities. Both want a return on their investment and both sell hope for the future through their products, services and outlay. The difference being a company would get pulled up in court for being unethical if a condition of their service was likely to spread disease or to discrimiate against someone for their sexual orientation or finding its managers were abusing the public, but seemingly religious dogma has the power to circumnavigate that safeguard. If the dream means a few more have to die through aids or are driven to suicide to keep the brands image simple and clear, then so be it... so it seems.

Ethical integrity of the Church aside, we opened the doors and he gladly came to say hi and to "offer a hand of friendship"... but a hand of friendship to whom?

For some reason, this is a state visit, the UK taxpayer is paying millions for this already proven to be fallible spokesman to come to try and re-enforce beliefes which are quite frankly shockingly misguided and ill-informed. Many kind, honest people just happy to live their life as they choose are by this state visit, without choice, paying for someone to come and reinforce to others a narrow set of morals out of sync with an educated world. Is he offering a hand of friendship to those who don't share his views or has he just come to insult those people in order to rally his fans?

Which leads me onto the Popes comments of hope and ermmm hate?

I'm starting to think he has his view of secularism confused a little and was maybe just trying to state words that are opposite to his view of his own organisation:

His words: "Today, the United Kingdom strives to be a modern and multicultural society. In this challenging enterprise, may it always maintain its respect for those traditional values and cultural expressions that more aggressive forms of secularism no longer value or even tolerate."

My proposed subtext: "Today, the Vatican City strives to be an archaic and monocultural society. In this challenging enterprise, may you let it always maintain its disrespect for those modern values and cultural expressions that the Catholic Church no longer values or even tolerates."

He likely used the word aggresive to both create a feeling of them and us, of an aggressive enemy and to have a come back to the likes of me who might criticise with what I hope might be a reasoned disagreement.

I thought that was the worst of it but sadly the Pope has managed to land an even bigger misinformed insult - tying together Atheism and Nazis, a transcript of which can be read here. Maybe just an insult if it wasn't for the fact that the Nazi's related Atheism with their Communist enemy. And to make this insult in a country where many an 'atheist/agnostic/humanist' likely took part in the war effort to defeat the Nazi's further adds to the ridiculous relationship! He failed also in his random recreation of history regarding the Nazi's to mention the inaction of the Pope of the time to even speak out against that regime. Is it maybe that Atheism like a religion is a belief or lack thereof and cannot be forced to be held or withheld so the only way to convince is to associate that belief with something that has been proven to be evil? Sadly mine and many other peoples secular schooling taught us enough to know when we hear poop.

Unsurprisingly the PR machine seems to have kicked in and the news hasn't really touched on it with the church distancing themselves from the implied connection. It didn't stop him critising the media though in a quite hypocritical manner stating that "it needed to have a greater responsibility because its opinions reach such a wide audience". LOL.

What I'd really love to hear are the views the Pope holds regarding whether he believes morals and ethics are synonymous to faith alone, and if so, are they only valid if held with active participation in a Catholic Church? Also an explanation as to why he thinks secularism is somehow bad (other than to the Church's coffers) because his views so far have had a hint of the BNP's rhetoric about them in that they are intolerant and misinformed. Secularism does not infringe personal belief, it only limits a groups religions bias in state matters where it impacts on the greater society made up of every personal belief, religious or otherwise. Its not divisive, its inclusive... which is a lot more than can be said of Vatican City's 'State' Monarchy.

As my door is already open to the Jehovahs Witnesses (who incidentally never did return to my invitation) I open my door gladly to the Pontiff if he'd care to visit and answer those questions and explain himself but I fear if two JW's shunned my offer a Pope will have even less time for me, after all there are more vulnerable or worthy people to 'help' than I.

As the saying goes; what you hate the most in others may be what you hate most about yourself and maybe, just maybe, the Queen and Pope should take heed in words they claim to uphold since its a trend that spans not only their religion but those before and after. Maybe they can take heed from the golden rule that the Pope seems to have forgotten - simply to treat others as you would like to be treated - Its even there in so many words within in the bible so its about time they both read it or re-read it - whichever edition they're reading from.

On a side note, the Pope has mentioned Northern Ireland in what seemed to be a fellow big up to the Queen and all involved saying, "Your Majesty's Government and the Government of Ireland, together with the political, religious and civil leaders of Northern Ireland, have helped give birth to a peaceful resolution of the conflict there". So at least there is some common sense coming out of this meeting. If only the words he uses to insult with were as diplomatic to those he didn't meet as they are to those he did.

No doubt more to follow.