Finishing Frank Thomas's "What's the Matter with Kansas" today at lunch, I had almost drifted gently and without obstacle through the book (which stubbornly refuses to find larger meaning to its well-written examination of a very boring and foolish state) before I hit a snag. In the last chapter, Thomas casually spends some time commenting on a Kansan formerly known as David Bawden, now elected Pope Michael I after a 32 year interregnum of the "true" Catholic Church.
Pause, if you will, and consider that for a second.
Apparently, since the Vatican II reforms (don't ask me, I only speak Secular), the Vatican and other sects have been on the wrong track. The false church's supporters can all be discounted due to various sins or false testimonies. The only remaining person eligible for the papacy, in other words, is David Bawden, and so he has donned the robes and funny hat. If you really feel up to it, you can visit the Pope's website to uncover this controversy in more detail. I'm not aware that anti-Popes John Paul II or Benedict XXAIV3 have clumsily-coded home pages hosted through generic free servers, so that may be a point in Michael I's favor.
I know that from a purely dispassionate perspective the Catholic Church is everything I loathe in a religion--dogmatic, superstitious, utterly medieval in structure and method--yet I can't help but feel some fondness for the Church. It just seems to get a better class of crazy than the openly-hostile Protestant fundamentalists.
Every week, I look forward to Fred's Left Behind Friday over at Slacktivist. I enjoy it partly because it is always fun seeing horrible Christian apocaliterature torn apart by someone who knows the subculture and picks up on the little inhumanities, but mostly as sweet revenge. See, I've read the first couple books in the Left Behind series. I got bored one summer, grabbed them off of Gnutella (what were they doing on filesharing anyway? Isn't it a sin to steal books?) and churned my way through them. So I have first-hand experience with Jenkins and LaHaye, and I'm going to share what I found so that you don't have to satisfy your curiosity the same way.
Let's get it out of the way: the books are awful. Really, really terrible stuff. It's one thing to have an ideological viewpoint, and it's another to simply have no fictional writing ability in the slightest. Jerry Jenkins (the primary writer--Tim LaHaye is the "religious consultant," another travesty all together) combines these two flaws into a nexus of Suck unequalled through known history. I like to think of it as a tiny black hole that he keeps in his back yard, where it sucks up wandering pets and small children into its event horizon and in return generates page upon page of hysterical fascist prose.
It hurts me to say this, but Left Behind is honestly worse than Ayn Rand, who was previously my benchmark for terrible fiction. At least with Rand you can pick out a decent pulp story if you skip most of the dialogue and the misogynistic rape scenes. Her writing functions fairly well as a comic book or as a movie, where time and space restraints would carve out only the barest essentials. In contrast, Left Behind could never be improved in any medium. This is too bad, because the first book has potential. Oh, I know: if you read the Slacktivist's coverage of the book, you'll see where he's caught all kinds of psychosis just in the first 80 pages. But if you're not paying such close attention (perhaps because you're having so much trouble reading Jenkins's traffic jam prose), the Rapture scenario can hold your attention momentarily. You may start to anticipate where a better writer could take this material, someone like Garth Ennis (or Stephen King, who basically wrote the same book but without the holes in The Stand). Worse, you may hope that Jenkins's reach simply exceeds his grasp, and perhaps he plans to tell such a gripping story, but simply lacks the talent to make it run smoothly.
Ha! At that point you have fallen into his trap. As soon as Jenkins manages to bring the characters together, through a series of increasingly unlikely devices, the book goes from being an adventure story to a 300-page scripture lesson, and it never eases up for the remaining 11 books (and one prequel now). The characters simply become observers, plodding through the same simple plot structure over and over again:
Not that I found out. After the first book, I tried to struggle through another, but it was just too much for me. Which, in a way, is too bad: did you know there's a whole genre of this stuff? I could have been set for new reading material for life. Rapture porn is one of the leading Christian subgenres, romance novels for the righteous. They're even taking over new genres now. One of Jerry Jenkins's pet projects (apart from his terrifying Left Behind for Kids books, coming soon to an rural elementary near you) is the trio Soon, Silenced, and Shaken, three science fiction novels that chronicle a double agent working undercover to save the Christian minority in a dystopian future. Christians in the minority? A rational, secular government that suppresses fundamentalists? Maybe to the intended audience that's a dystopia. After reading Left Behind and realizing that these books sell millions of copies, it's starting to sound pretty good to me.
Gripped as we are (See "Great Moments in Catholicism") in the middle of POPE-MANIA 2005 in the media, I might be a little hyper-conscious of religion infringing on my life. On the other hand, a paranoid is simply in possession of all the facts. Either way, this "Revelations" show is really starting to annoy me--I get that little twitch whenever I see religious-themed advertisements in godless heathen venues like Salon.com, and "Revelations" is particularly egregious.
Google it, and the ever-helpful TV Tome states:
Drawn together by personal tragedy, these unlikely partners -- one who worships God and one who worships Science -- are propelled into a deepening mystery, finding evidence that the world, as predicted by The Book of Revelation, has reached The End of Days.
Of course, we could snark about miniseries casting all day--and maybe one day I will--but it's all just icing on the cake. What really bothers me about this is the insinuation that the "skeptic" is the one who's out of touch with the "truth" of a biblical apocalypse loosely adapted for television. That's the kind of sloppy, wishful dramatic thinking that makes fundamentalists so infuriating. It feeds their persecution complex and their conviction that a patchy book written by a 2000 year-deceased hitchhiker is somehow more truthful than hard science, great literature, and non-Fox journalism. Note the phrasing in that first quote: "...one who worships science." Nobody "worships" science--but the fundamentalists need to think they do, so that their own kooky fantasies can have equal time with cold facts. In an era when almost half of America thinks that evolution is a mistaken belief held only by elitists, our society doesn't need "Revelations" to muddy the waters.
So I would like to offer the following alternative to the networks, completely free of charge: a show about a freelance skeptic who dramatically debunks supernatural frauds and fallacies in and around American culture. Imagine the X-Files without the blatant bias against Scully's point of view. We can even throw in a crisis of faith, some doubt, and romantic tension if that'll help. Here, try this pitch on for size:
Drawn together by personal tragedy, these unlikely partners -- one who practices Reason and one who worships God -- are propelled into the deepening mystery of credulity and superstition in America.
I couldn't write it--I'd be too vicious. But get a good, rational writer on this, one who's got some sympathy for the devil (as it were) and can handle both sides fairly but critically, and you could be looking at some great television.
I found this while walking around downtown Arlington with the Nerdlet the other night. It was in a Catholic bookstore window.
You just can't make that kind of thing up.