In my experience (and here is a limit to my argument) an atheist outlook can encourage/justify a lifestyle where an open-minded investigation of religion with the possibility of future religious belief/action is forgotten or consciously left behind.

In contrast, an agnostic outlook can have the practical consequence of encouraging/justifying a life of (semi-)regular inquiries into religion with the possibility for religious belief/action always open.

Of course, it is always possible for the atheist to take up religion, but this will be contrary to the practical consequences of their theoretical position. An agnostic’s conversion can be (in part) because of the practical consequences of their theoretical commitment.

This practical difference is too important to be ignored by the Pope’s fallacious position.

And, finally, none of this is to mention the other practical differences between the two positions that aren’t related to religious practice (or the lack thereof). These differences, while perhaps not of high relative significance to the Pope, can be very important to agnostics.

P.S. Great blog! It’s now a regular read.