« The Real Roe | Main | Defender of Life »
September 29, 2005
From the people who only care about people before they are born
Pope announces that World Day of the Sick will be held in Australia
The World Day of the Sick will bring hundreds of religious leaders and health experts to South Australia from around the globe.
Cardinal Javier Lozano Barragan, who leads the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Assistance to Health Care Workers, arrived in Adelaide this week to begin preparations for the event.
Cardinal Barragan said the World Day of the Sick would be part of a wider three-day event that would look closely at health issues and human dignity.
A special Papal emissary will also come to Adelaide for the gathering to deliver a message from Pope Benedict.
Adelaide Archbishop Philip Wilson said the conference would bring health and the dignity deserved by the sick and the dying to the forefront of the global community's conscience.
Today, the Pope addressed Mexican bishops on an ad limina visit:
The Pope told the bishops that the episcopal duty to teach consists in the transmission of the Gospel "with its moral and religious values, bearing in mind the various situations and aspirations arising from contemporary society, the situation of which the pastors must know well. 'It is important that special efforts be made to explain properly the reasons for the Church's position, stressing that it is not a case of imposing on non-believers a vision based on faith, but of interpreting and defending the values rooted in the very nature of the human person'."
He continued: "At the same time, the pastors of the Church in Mexico must pay special attention ... to the most unprotected groups and to the poor. ... From the Gospel, the appropriate response is to promote the solidarity and peace that make justice truly possible. For this reason the Church seeks effective collaboration in order to eradicate all forms of marginalization, orienting Christians to practice justice and peace. In this context, encourage those with greater resources to share them."
The Pope affirmed the need "not only to alleviate the most serious needs, but to go to the roots thereof, proposing measures to give social, political and economic structures a fairer and more solidary configuration. In this way, charity will be at the service of culture, politics, economy and the family, and will become the cement for authentic human and community development."
Brazilian bishop begins hunger strike:
His protest is against one of Brazil's most ambitious but controversial environmental projects. It would see water from the 3,000-km (1,800-mile) Sao Francisco river diverted via a series of canals and aqueducts to four drought-prone states in north-eastern Brazil. The project will cost more than $2bn. Opponents say the scheme will benefit only the wealthiest landowners in the north-east and reduce the capacity of dams on the Sao Francisco river to generate hydro-electric energy.
Posted by Amy Welborn | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83451be0d69e200d83424844353ef
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference From the people who only care about people before they are born:
» Martyrdom: OK; suicide: not OK from Catholic Light
A bishop in Brazil is going on a hunger strike, threatening to go to his death, if the country's President doesn't put the kibosh on a proposed water diversion project. He seems to have forgotten that direct intentional suicide, even... [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 29, 2005 11:07:38 AM
» Martyrdom: OK; suicide: not OK from Catholic Light
A bishop in Brazil is going on a hunger strike, threatening to go to his death, if the country's President doesn't put the kibosh on a proposed water diversion project. He seems to have forgotten that direct intentional suicide, even... [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 29, 2005 11:09:38 AM
» Martyrdom: OK; suicide: not OK from Catholic Light
A bishop in Brazil has started a hunger strike and threatens to go to his death, if the country's President doesn't put the kibosh on a proposed water diversion project. He seems to have forgotten that direct intentional suicide, even... [Read More]
Tracked on Sep 29, 2005 11:17:23 AM
Comments
Committing suicide if someone does not act in accordance with your desires is mortally sinful. Someone needs to give the bishop a kick up the backside.
Posted by: Tone Blunt at Sep 29, 2005 9:38:44 AM
For some reason they don't get this in Pakistan either: Catholics there have named things in honor of the bishop who shot himself a few years ago protesting some invidious legislation. Does the CDF need to make a statement about this?
Posted by: RC at Sep 29, 2005 10:05:17 AM
"Opponents say." Is that the best readers can expect to evaluate the situation?
How good is Bishop Cappio's information? Is it anecdotal? Does it take into consideration the overall welfare? Is his mental health sound? What is his record and reputation? Is it accurate or prudent for a Christian to say to a political leader, "My life is in your hands"?
What are the geological, meteorological, economic etc. facts of the project? Is there political corruption involved? Does Liberation Theology and/or the current state of Catholic Social Justice Thought have a means (or any interest) to consider the broad range of facts here, whatever they are, without collapsing into formulaic utilitarianism or Adoration of the Picturesque Tribe? Is it wise to believe what we read?
I'm weary of the cattle-prod press tweaking my "caring" on faith and on spec., without providing meaningful and trustworthy context. I'm particularly weary of not being able to rely on some presumption of wisdom on the part of Shepherds serving the Body of Christ. Perhaps the Portuguese-language documents say more. Perhaps not.
Why should readers be asked to engage with this kind of thing, without equipping them to do so? Are we really down with "caring" being hand-wringing in subsidized ignorance? Googling finds material out of Berkeley CA that emphasizes one part of the discussion, from a predictable slant. It implies that even the small protestor groups don't agree with what should be done. It also includes a photo at a "religious gathering" to discuss the issue.
Inquiring minds, hearts, and contributors want to know. The brevity of the posting is entirely appropriate for a blog like Amy's, but it highlights the attenuations and shortcomings of the sources on which we base our discussions.
Posted by: dilys at Sep 29, 2005 10:22:50 AM
The Bishop is speaking and acting for the many thousands of poor and illiterate who have no voice and are totally unaware of how things get done in a country as huge and remote as Brazil. Pernambuco thrives on polcies that favor the latifundarios, those who own thousands of acres and operate as they see fit. They own the legislators and the judges and some of the clergy. Those who challenge them are usually assassinated by hired thugs.It is good to see a man of courage take a position even though it is not defined enough to suit us bloggers in the USA. Remember Romero and also the 77yo nun who made a stand in Amazonas. Even John Wayne and The Lone Ranger would walk away in disgust rather than take on these ornery cusses because they just keep on abusing the poor for their own ends. Fighting them is a lonely and dangerous pursuit. Until recently most of the Bishops were in their pockets.
Hooray for this Bishop and pray for him.
Posted by: Tom Kelty at Sep 29, 2005 10:59:18 AM
In my excitement I neglected to tell you that I spent 6 years in Brazil as a franciscan missionary during the 60s. At one point, I was in the state of Goias, rice, bean and cattle country. The northeast of Brazil had turned into a dustbowl. The men came to our area in open trucks starving and seeking work.
The landowners, mostly catholics,made their picks after checking their muscles and teeth right there in the town square. Primitive? Feudal? The situation has not changed much. The clergy has an obligation to point to abuses.
Posted by: Tom Kelty at Sep 29, 2005 11:09:54 AM
The northeast of Brazil was always a dry waste. Please consult that great Brazilian classic, REBELLION IN THE BACKLANDS, about a spectacular instance of the poor making themselves heard--for all the good it did them.
Posted by: Sandra Miesel at Sep 29, 2005 1:41:20 PM
Yep. Platitudes
Ever wonder why some principles are optional? And some others will deny you communion?
And ever wonder that some principles will not deny communion, if they are held by the 'right kind' of people?
[Where was the thunder of the Bishop that condemned Gray Davis, when Arnold ran version]
The Catholic Church - sucking up to the wealthy. Still cant give up the ghost of the Roman Empire and follow Christ.
Catholic intellectuals - mostly elitists and racists that think they are special, and pushing a rampantly corrupt, greedy and unjust system, based on feudal patronage under the covers of being anti-abortion. An abortion stance which they cannot convert people to, because they push a greedy, aristocratic feudal society which is totally at odds with a the love and holiness that drives a pro-life stance.
It is easy to make out that a McBrien or Wills pushes an idiotic version of Catholicism. But to make out that Wiegel or Burke or Egan or a Neuhas or Wellborn is peddling a self-serving Catholicism - one that sets up an aristocratic society in which they get patronage and hand out patronage - is not so easy. And so American Catholics - the real kind, not the idiotic - follow Europe.
Posted by: Madmax at Sep 29, 2005 2:43:41 PM
If anybody figures out what Madmax is talking about, please post.
Posted by: RC at Sep 29, 2005 3:40:57 PM
Is this really suicide on the bishop's part? He does not seem to be directly intending his death. Rather, he seems to be making a bold prophetic stance on behalf of the poor. His death may be the unintended consequence of trying to do something to help others. Suicide is not generally thought of as altruistic. Isn't this an example of the principle of double effect? Life is not an absolute value even in the most traditionalist teaching of the Catholic Church. Why condemn him, especially when he may be within the purview of traditional Catholic teaching? Perhaps, he should be admired as a prophet and a saint. I have to agree with Tom Kelty, who seems to be especially informed about the situation in Brazil.
Posted by: dicax at Sep 29, 2005 5:00:04 PM
Two things: a hunger strike need not run to completion to be a witness or to be effective. Hence, talk of suicide is premature.
And second, it is the political Republicans, not Catholic bishops, who only care about people before they're born, and even then, only when it suits their political agenda. Even my current supposedly-conservative bishop has a balanced seamless garment approach on pro-life issues.
Posted by: Todd at Sep 29, 2005 9:13:15 PM
Madmax is spouting anti-Catholic marxist drivel.
Posted by: Delance at Sep 30, 2005 1:02:19 AM
Tom Kelly? Please take easy on this liberation theology stuff. I'm a Brazilian. Marxism is corrupting the faithful in Brazil
You know what? The Catholic faith is under attack from all sides. TV indoctrinates people with spiritualism and reincarnation. On the streets, evangelicals slander the Church. All the Bishops talk about is social issues.
What's the point? Every day, people are less catholic, and there are less catholics around. No one cares to what the Bishops say anymore.
The power of the Catholic Church to do anything good when it's taken over by a materialist anti-christian ideology is zero.
Even if all the bad things you describe are real, the remedy based on leftist ideology is even worse.
Posted by: Delance at Sep 30, 2005 1:12:35 AM
I was hearing a priest I like speak the other day. He was speaking about charity. Then he started to speak about "social responability" and other nonsensical left-wing ideas. How did a great concept like Christian charity became mixed with a spiritually empty materialitic notion like that? This is a disaster.
Posted by: Delance at Sep 30, 2005 1:14:32 AM
As usual, St. Augustine said it best when he corresponded in a letter to a Donatist in 416AD:
Consider the divine Scriptures, and examine them to the utmost of your ability, and see whether this was ever done by any one of the just and faithful, though subjected to the most grievous evils by persons who were endeavouring to drive them, not to eternal life, to which you are being compelled by us, but to eternal death. I have heard that you say that the Apostle Paul intimated the lawfulness of suicide, when he said, "Though I give my body to be burned," a supposing that because he was there enumerating all the good things which are of no avail without charity, such as the tongues of men and of angels, and all mysteries, and all knowledge, and all prophecy, and the distribution of one's goods to the poor, he intended to include among these good things the act of bringing death upon one. self. But observe carefully and learn in what sense Scripture says that any man may give his body to be burned. Certainly not that any man may throw himself into the fire when he is harassed by a pursuing enemy, but that, when he is compelled to choose between doing wrong and suffering wrong, he should refuse to do wrong rather than to suffer wrong, and so give his body into the power of the executioner, as those three men did who were being compelled to worship the golden image, while he who was compelling them threatened them with the burning fiery furnace if they did not obey. They refused to worship the image: they did not cast themselves into the fire, and yet of them it is written that they "yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god except their own God." This is the sense in which the apostle said, "If I give my body to be burned."
Our Catholic faith is so cool....
Posted by: frank zapiain at Sep 30, 2005 9:06:47 AM
Talk of suicide is not premature. The only reason hunger strikes are effective is because they are backed up by the threat ("only termination of the river diversion plan or death will end his hunger strike") of being carried through to death. So either the bishop is lying about his intention, or he is planning suicide should others fail to act in accordance with his wishes. Either way he's hardly setting a sterling example for his flock.
RC,
Yes, you're right about the Pakistani bishop. He shot himself to protest the blasphemy law.
Posted by: Tone Blunt at Sep 30, 2005 10:02:19 AM
"The only reason hunger strikes are effective is because they are backed up by the threat of being carried through to death."
Was that the official wikipedia definition, or does it comes from the pages of some conservative tome? If we really wanted to know what the bishop means, we'd ask him, not take somebody else's word for it. Even wikipedia.
Posted by: Todd at Sep 30, 2005 6:12:47 PM
Delance,
I have trouble following your reasoning. I was trying to point out why the Bishop took action. You seem to be saying that this involves liberation theology. Do you mean that the Bishop should limit himself to the sanctuary and prayers? Even when the Bishop sees the wolves preying on his flock? Even when the Bishop (and you) know how political power can be abused to benefit the wealthy.
Posted by: Tom Kelty at Sep 30, 2005 7:31:20 PM
Tom,
Politics is a tool to exploit people. The "social movements" can exploit the poor just as much as feudal landowners, if not more. Have you ever read "Animal farm"?
One question is: can a catholic even make a hunger strike?
To answer your question, bishops should not limit themselves to prayer. But they should not allow the Curch to become a tool for ideologies and politics. There's a big difference there. And remember we are talking about an anti-Catholic materialistic ideology who hunts down and murder Christians every chance it gets.
Posted by: Delance at Sep 30, 2005 11:24:53 PM
Very good.
Posted by: erica at Sep 30, 2005 11:31:55 PM
OK, as "chief Brazilian commentator" in this blog :-D, I'm afraid that the bishop is misinformed.
Ideas about diverting the S. Francisco are almost a century old. And they stem from the simple fact that mere 50 miles from this huge river (average width of 3mls and up to 30mls wide) people starve to death due to years-long draught cycles.
Perhaps land owners would be directly benefited by this, much like those in California were. Then again, land owners are also employers and those starving to death nowadays could become farm employees, should such enterprise create more fertile land.
We're talking about an area of the country in which children are not given a name, not even baptized, until they're 1 to 3 years-old, because of the highest infant mortality rate in Brazil, probably in the Americas. The reason being that it's easier to lose child whose name one doesn't know. :-)
May Mary of Aparecida pray for Brazil.
Posted by: Augustine at Oct 1, 2005 10:15:52 PM
