The Pot and the Kettle: A Thrasymachean Parable

“The strong do what they can, while the weak suffer what they must.” C’est vrais!

Gianna Sullivan, a Maryland woman who has for years been claiming to experience visions of the Virgin Mary, has been told by the Holy See to cut it out. In response, Sullivan has ceased her monthly gatherings.

Isn’t the Church just being a bully? Aren’t they behaving like a giant pious Wal-Mart, driving out the poor

Sullivan having a vision of Mary while a priest looks at her ass.

Mom-and-Pop sources of divine revelation? Who – besides them, that is – granted the Catholic Church a monopoly on the experience of God?

Of course, I can see where Sullivan’s competition is hard for the Bishops to bear. After all, they’ve already lost so many to that Protestant Thing.

According to the story, the archdiocese “concluded in 2000 that the alleged visions were not divine”. This left me wondering: How exactly does one go about deciding whether or not a vision is divine? Does a Bishop reach into his robe, pull out a protractor and a test tube, make some measurements and run some tests, submit them to the Vatican for review, and then wait two weeks for results from the Pope’s Divinity Lab?

Oh, wait. That’s what a scientist would do. With religion, the situation is just a little fuzzier.

It turns out the Catholic Church has four criteria by which it decides whether or not an apparition is divinely sourced.

First, there must be “moral certainty” (whatever that is) that the apparition has actually occurred. Extensive interviews may be conducted to determine that the alleged visionary was not on hallucinogenic drugs, not in a psychotic state, not on the road to Damascus … er… well, you know what I mean. Interestingly, the site of the alleged apparition may be visited. God only knows what the investigators would look for. (I can hear it now. “No soap, ma’am,” the Bishop says. “Although the bush was burned, it was indeed consumed, proving that your vision was not divine.”)

Second, the character of the alleged visionary is appraised. Most brazenly, the applicant must be “obedient to ecclesiastical authorities.” I can almost hear Jesus turning in his grave.

Third, the content of the vision must be “theologically acceptable”. So, my apparition of Mary with a mustache doesn’t count, then?

Fourth, the alleged apparition must result in “positive spiritual assets that endure (prayer, conversion, increase of charity).”

So here we have the Catholic Church, which rests completely on claims for which there is no compelling evidence, telling a woman to stop making claims for which there is no compelling evidence. Hmmm.

So what’s the difference between the Catholic Church and Gianna Sullivan, that the one gets to boss the other around? The only difference is this: the beliefs of the Church, though no more substantiated or less deluded than those of Gianne Sullivan, are supported and financed by millions of people around the world.

The lesson to take home is that, as long as it is bigger and stronger, the pot gets to call the kettle black. But the pot is no less black for that.