Airliners.net

This might be topic which has been discussed many times. However, there was a new development in Brazil that puts in perspective the real stand of the Roman Catholic Church on issues such HIV prevention and birth control.

A famous Brazilian singer called Daniela Mercury was scheduled to perform on the festivities celebrating St Francis Xavier (Xavier year) now in December, attended by Pope Benedict XVI himself and thousands more. This singer is an Ambassador for UNICEF and UNAIDS, and has participated in countless campaigns regarding the use of condoms and the need for awareness against HIV/AIDS, which is a serious health problem in Brazil. However, once the Vatican became aware of the role of the singer in the aforementioned campaigns, her participation in the festivities was abruptly cancelled. The reason was explicit: she condoned a practice (safe-sex) that was abhorred and condemned by the catholic church, at least officially.

Needless to say it made many Brazilians very upset and beginning to question the values thus far imposed or suggested by the church (still very powerful in Brazil) upon them.

A Brazilian writer (Claudiney Prietto) started a protest movement on the internet which has gathered thousand signatures thus far, protesting what he calls "the medieval ways of thinking of the Catholic Church".

For those interested in some more details, these are the links (mostly Portuguese, some entries in the signature book in English):

http://danielamercury.freelinuxhost.com/

http://www.danielamercury.1br.net/

I understand that the Vatican has every right to refuse someone to perform in such an event if that person does not fulfill their "criteria" for what a good Christian might be. However, I think it is appalling to still condemn any form of prevention in regards to STD's just because in the doctrine people should have monogamous sex for procreation purposes only (after marriage). With millions of people infected by HIV, and sex still being "performed" for other purposes (thank God!), I think that it would be time for a little change in attitude or perhaps some re-thinking on the part of the Holy See.

I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions.

Cheers

Alex

Quoting Flyingbabydoc (Thread starter): I leave it to you to draw your own conclusions.

I'm all for anything that exposes one's hypocrisies. Remember that just a few years ago the "criteria" for what a good Catholic/Christian might be would have included eating fish on Fridays and women covering their heads in church. Times change.

The following quote always sums these arguements up for me:

President Bartlet (Martin Sheen): "I like how you call homosexuality an abombination."

Jenna Jacobs: "I don't say homosexuality is an abomination, Mr. President, the Bible does."

President Bartlet: "Yes, it does. Leviticus."

Jenna Jacobs: "18:22."

President Bartlet: "Chapter and verse. I wanted to ask you a couple of questions while I have you here.

I'm interested in selling my youngest daughter into slavery as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. She's a Georgetown sophmore, speaks fluent Italian, always cleared the table when it was her turn. What would a good price for her be?

While thinking about that, can I ask another?

My Chief of Staff Leo McGarry insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly says he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself or is it okay to call the police?

Here's one that's really important because we've got a lot of sports fans in this town: touching the skin of a dead pig makes one unclean. Leviticus 11:7. If they promise to wear gloves, can the Washington Redskins still play football? Can Notre Dame? Can West Point?

Does the whole town really have to be together to stone my brother John for planting different crops side by side?

Can I burn my mother in a small family gathering for wearing garments made from two different threads?

Think about that, will you?

Oh, and one last thing. You may have mistaken this for your meeting of the ignorant tight-asses club but in this building, when the President stands, nobody sits."

Noone can beat the West Wing for provocative thinking  

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 1): I'm all for anything that exposes one's hypocrisies. Remember that just a few years ago the "criteria" for what a good Catholic/Christian might be would have included eating fish on Fridays and women covering their heads in church. Times change.

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 2): "I don't say homosexuality is an abomination, Mr. President, the Bible does."

I absolutely agree with you both. It is more than time to stop the hypocrisy and at least try to make people a bit more aware of the danger such mind-setting can be for the whole society. I am not catholic, I think each one can live by the rules they see fit for their personal affairs. But when it is a matter of health that affects us all (we still live in one planet only), religion ceases to be a factor, IMHO.

Alex

Hehe... nice post, RichardPrice! I always wonder why so many people think that motley collection of history books, laws, allegories and fiction called the Bible should define their lives, but to each his own.

As for the AIDS issue - hasn't the Roman Catholic church always needed decades, if not centuries, to acceopt reality? It's been that way since long before Galileo, and I'm afraid it won't change anytime soon. Pity that diseases can't be cured by praying, but that doesn't fit Ratzinger's doctrine...

But didn't you know that using condoms is the biggest sin of them all in RAT-zinger's mind?

Even worse than being buggered by a Catholic priest.

And as far as those women who contract AIDs from their husbands/partners etc in Africa, at least when they die a horrible, painful, tragic death they'll head straight to heaven as long as they haven't used those evil condoms.

Wouldn't you want that too?

Oh, goody. Another Catholic bashing thread.  

Aw come on guys. Give it a rest!   

Charles, SJ

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 6): Oh, goody. Another Catholic bashing thread. Aw come on guys. Give it a rest!

if the catholic church decides to 'give it a rest' and stop talking nonsense about HIV/AIDS then I will be more than delighted to give it a rest and leave the catholic church alone - in the meantime while they continue to take such an irresponsible line on such a vital issue they (and you) can expect people to keep taking them to task over it .

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 6): Oh, goody. Another Catholic bashing thread. Aw come on guys. Give it a rest!

OK.

The Pope is a great guy who has only the best interests of all at heart.

The Pope will ensure that a prayer will be said for all AIDS stricken Ugandan women when they croak (Well, maybe just a mass prayer once a month or so to cover the 50,000 or so dead because the Pope is a busy man).

Condoms are evil; the world is flat; Galileo was a charlatan; the Pope is always right and is always good and has always been infallible all throughout history.

We are all evil and bigoted and will burn in hell for even hinting of infallibility of the Vatican.

My point is we all know how everyone feels about the Catholic Church. I don't think that those feelings are going to change anytime soon. I also try on these forums to live up to the true spirit of what a Catholic and a Christian means, but am not always perfect in doing so. That's the way all Catholics are, including the people in the Vatican. They're humans just like you and me.

Really. This has been discussed to death. Can we please find something else to have a flamewar about?

Charles, SJ

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 9): My point is we all know how everyone feels about the Catholic Church.

It would make no difference to me one way or the other what faith a person is when reporting the story about Daniela Mercury. It was interesting news, and I'm glad the OP posted it.

I'm really not sure what it is about people discussing what the Vatican is doing in relation to this issue that offends you.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 10): I'm really not sure what it is about people discussing what the Vatican is doing in relation to this issue that offends you.

It's not about discussing what the Vatican does or doesn't do that's the problem. It's about how every time this issue comes up it becomes an invitation for everyone to moan and kvetch about how hypocrictical, intolerant, shallow etc. etc. the Church is. And what you posted above seemed, in my mind anyway, to be more about flamebait than to say anything constructive about what Alex posted.

I've said it before and it bears repeating. If the Catholic Church (or any church for that matter) got rid of all their hypocrites, there would be no one left. The purpose of the Church is not to exclude hypocrites, the reason the church exists is because we ARE hypocrites in need of God's saving and forgiving love. And to be honest, I have my hands so full dealing with the effects of my own acts of hypocracy that I really don't have time to point fingers at anyone about theirs.

Charles, SJ

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 11): And what you posted above seemed, in my mind anyway, to be more about flamebait than to say anything constructive about what Alex posted.

Interesting viewpoint. But if you really thought it was flamebait, you should have used the "suggest delete" button. I understand from a reliable source that it works exceedingly well.

That said, this was the line I was most happy about--that the latest action by the Vatican was causing Catholics in Brazil to question what I believe to be another example of the church's hypocrisy:

"Needless to say it made many Brazilians very upset and beginning to question the values thus far imposed or suggested by the church (still very powerful in Brazil) upon them."

You may not agree with me, and could have said that without stating that I was merely attempting to fan the flames.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 12): Interesting viewpoint. But if you really thought it was flamebait, you should have used the "suggest delete" button. I understand from a reliable source that it works exceedingly well.

I did.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 12): You may not agree with me, and could have said that without stating that I was merely attempting to fan the flames.

No one is suggesting that people accept teachings, religious or otherwise, without question. Questioning leads to understanding, which in turn allows them to appropriately form their consicience, to which they then must act on it. Nothing wrong with that.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 12): You may not agree with me, and could have said that without stating that I was merely attempting to fan the flames.

From where I sit it was flamebait. Call me oversenstive, but the level of Church bashing I see here, as a Catholic, really starts to get old. You are welcome to disagree, but it's probably best to let the mods decide, and I'll abide by their decision.

Charles, SJ

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 13): Questioning leads to understanding, which in turn allows them to appropriately form their consicience, to which they then must act on it. Nothing wrong with that.

Excellent. Something we agree on, and the reason I expressed my enthusiasm for the current developments in Brazil.

Quoting AeroWesty (Reply 14): Excellent. Something we agree on, and the reason I expressed my enthusiasm for the current developments in Brazil.

  

Charles, SJ

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 13): From where I sit it was flamebait. Call me oversenstive, but the level of Church bashing I see here, as a Catholic, really starts to get old. You are welcome to disagree, but it's probably best to let the mods decide, and I'll abide by their decision.

Islam allows planes to be crashed into buildings, Christianity allows thousands upon thousands to become infected with HIV. Religion is the one baiting angry response, not the other way around.

Quoting 777236ER (Reply 16): Islam allows planes to be crashed into buildings, Christianity allows thousands upon thousands to become infected with HIV. Religion is the one baiting angry response, not the other way around.

Too generalised. Certain Islam factions allow terrorist actions and certain Christian factions demand no protection against HIV.

Please dont carry the stupid generalisations such as above, as thats how hate carries over from a small minority into that against a populace.

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 9): That's the way all Catholics are, including the people in the Vatican. They're humans just like you and me.

The problem arises from the fact that 'the people in the Vatican' make decisions that impact millions of people, including large numbers of non-Catholics. When those decisions have a direct negative impact on people's health and well-being, then the Church is going to be the target of vocal and passionate protest. Yes the Church is the but of a lot of bashing, but no more so than Bush, Chirac, the Dems, the Repubs, Liberals, Conservatives, etc., etc. If you're in a position to influence society, you're a target.

It's a private party, isn't? She has been uninvited, but I'm sure she will survive and move on.

Move on, that's precisely what a lot of non-Catholics A.netters should do regarding OUR Church. You don't like it? Fair enough, I hope you will find one that fits you. Nonetheless, consider that just as we don't give a rat ass about your beliefs and your denomination, we Catholics neither want nor need your input about OUR Church.

Thanks in advance.

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 2): Noone can beat the West Wing for provocative thinking

Yea right... As if you need to be "brave or provocative" to bash Christianity in the Liberal mass-media in America.  

Quoting SFOMEX (Reply 19): Move on, that's precisely what a lot of non-Catholics A.netters should do regarding OUR Church. You don't like it? Fair enough, I hope you will find one that fits you. Nonetheless, consider that just as we don't give a rat ass about your beliefs and your denomination, we Catholics neither want nor need your input about OUR Church. Thanks in advance. Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 2): Noone can beat the West Wing for provocative thinking Yea right... As if you need to be "brave or provocative" to bash Christianity in the Liberal mass-media in America.

Tsk, tsk. You are hardly one to be commenting on this.   

Quoting SFOMEX (Reply 19): Catholics neither want nor need your input about OUR Church.

And as soon as "YOUR" Church quits influencing public policy that affects me, I'll be happy to ignore it. Until that time, I find myself forced to stand against many of the policies of "YOUR" Church, because "YOUR" Church would like nothing better than to see many of its policies and beliefs implemented as laws in MY country.

Quoting Searpqx (Reply 18): Yes the Church is the but of a lot of bashing, but no more so than Bush, Chirac, the Dems, the Repubs, Liberals, Conservatives, etc., etc. If you're in a position to influence society, you're a target.

True enough. Yet there must also be a way of dialoguing this without it becoming yet another grenade in the culture wars.

People have free will, and conscience formation involves the use of practical wisdom to make moral decisions about how and what to do. The time for theocracys has passed, however. The Vatican can teach, they can speak out, but the actual enactment of policies is up to governments and is down to individuals to discern, with the help of the Holy Spirit how to make these things real in their lives. All the Church expects in that light is for us to be good people who do our best.

Charles, SJ

Charles if only the pope had your insight.

Welcome to my RU list,
WrenchBender

Quoting Ctbarnes (Reply 22): All the Church expects in that light is for us to be good people who do our best.

That is a most commendable view. I agree with you completely. That is the way I see every religion should behave. Unfortunately, as an insider in the catholic church, you will agree that people who think like you are seldom in the top ranking offices.

I did not mean for the post to be a flame-bait. I think it is an issue to be discussed by all. I think the church has had leaders that made a huge impact and a leap forward (John XXIII comes to mind - Vatican II). I see a trend towards conservatism here that can be dangerous, in a different but still damaging way like extremism in other religions.

I respect the opinion of each religion, its members, its leaders. I just think that the health of one individual or of mankind as a whole is as "sacred" as those beliefs. I will always speak against a rather stupid policy (sorry, but it is stupid) which can result in further HIV spreading. You would be surprised in how many women are infected with HIV nowadays in Brazil, a trend that is becoming more and more similar to that in Africa. Since so many schools are catholic owned in the whole country, and religion is a subject in many public schools too, I think it is a crime to be preaching against condom use among this population and particularly among the kids. That was my point all along.

Alex

Quoting RichardPrice (Reply 17): Too generalised. Certain Islam factions allow terrorist actions and certain Christian factions demand no protection against HIV. Please dont carry the stupid generalisations such as above, as thats how hate carries over from a small minority into that against a populace.

But nevertheless, in both cases religion is the start for a lot of death, pain and suffering. In fact, nearly all bad things in the world are caused by religion or religious-type ideologies.

The Quran promises virgins in heaven, the Bible says homosexuals abominations. Religion is the cause of problems, not 'perversion of religion', whatever that may be.

So when is the Pope going to be taken to trial for crimes against humanity?