Quem anda a tramar o Papa?

Paolo Rodari e Andrea Tornielli, dois vaticanistas italianos, acabam de publicar um livro (Rodari P., Tornielli A., Attacco a Ratzinger. Accuse e scandali, profezie e complotti contro Benedetto XVI, Piemme 2010, pp. 321) no qual demonstram exaustivamente que Bento XVI foi o Papa mais atacado na história da Igreja. Desde os movimentos abortistas passando pelos grupos feministas, promotores da ideologia “gay”, controladores populacionais, laicistas ocidentais, fundamentalistas islâmicos, progressistas católicos – incluindo Bispos e Cardeais -, tradicionalistas infiéis até aos burocratas incompetentes e desmazelados da Cúria Romana se têm distinguido pela sanha ou pela irresponsabilidade para com o Santo Padre.

As condecorações da Santa Sé ao presidente Cavaco e ao primeiro-ministro Sócrates que um semanário da capital hoje noticia com grandes parangonas[1] não passam de mais um episódio a acrescentar aos demais.

Reza a notícia que as distinções foram atribuídas depois do presidente ter promulgado o “casamento gay”. Independentemente da intenção subjectiva de quem recebeu a novidade e a publicou com destaque, objectivamente falando as repercussões que terão no público, em particular nos católicos, serão, primeiro, as de que quem combate pelos valores e princípios inegociáveis só se opõe à reeleição de Cavaco e à governança de Sócrates por causa do falsamente chamado casamento entre homossexuais; segundo, que o Papa não atribui qualquer importância à legislação e à promulgação dessa “lei” injusta; terceiro, que não só não vê qualquer incompatibilidade na feitura e promulgação dessas leis por parte de católicos ou de qualquer outra pessoa como distingue essas iniquidades condecorando os seus autores; quarto, o Santo Padre quis dar, aos católicos, uma indicação de voto – em Cavaco - para as presidenciais em Cavaco. Em suma, essa multidão de católicos e de muitas outras pessoas de boa vontade que têm batalhado denodadamente pelo Bem Comum não passam de uns fundamentalista histéricos e embrutecidos que estão em manifesta contradição como pensamento e o agir de Bento XVI.

Se é certo que será isto o que pensará o comum das pessoas ainda é mais certo que qualquer uma dessas conclusões não pode estar mais longe da verdade.

Convirá em primeiro lugar, antes de irmos às condecorações, esclarecer que aquilo que nos faz rejeitar com todas as veras a reeleição de Cavaco é um ror de monstruosidades medonhas que ele enquanto presidente promulgou: procriação artificial, experimentação letal em seres humanos embrionários, clonagem, liberalização do aborto, divórcio expresso sem culpa, educação sexual perversa e obscena nas escolas, regime das chamadas uniões de facto e pseudo-casamento entre pessoas do mesmo sexo. Ora em relação a todas estas “leis” iníquas e injustas sempre se opôs com toda a determinação e inteligência Joseph Ratzinger como teólogo, como Arcebispo, como Cardeal e agora como Papa Bento XVI. Só quem não conheça a sua vida e os seus escritos é que poderá fantasiar absurdos surrealistas como aquelas “conclusões” que elencámos acima. A verdade, porém, é que a imensa maioria das pessoas, incluindo católicos, não o conhece a não ser por impressões vagas e distorcidas que de vez em quando lhe chegam por preconceituosos e ignaros meios de comunicação social, inclusive da Igreja.

Então o que significam as condecorações?!, perguntará justamente espantado quem me lê. Não significam nada; e significam muito. Parece paradoxal que afirme e uma coisa e o seu contrário como sendo ambas verdadeiras. Mas o esclarecimento é simples. Quando o Santo Padre faz visitas também na qualidade de chefe de estado há umas formalidades, que não passam disso mesmo, combinadas entre os ministérios dos negócios estrangeiros do país visitado e o da secretaria de estado do Vaticano, em que se trocam condecorações entre as autoridades como um gesto de benevolência (“não quebrar a cana fendida”, como escreve o profeta Isaías) ou de gratidão pelo acolhimento prestado. É algo de parecido com as trocas de presentes entre o Papa e as autoridades que recebe. Ou para dar um exemplo mais corriqueiro: quando o Papa nos seus discursos trata por Vossa Excelência, o presidente do Irão ou da Coreia do Norte que o visitam (se é que o visitaram alguma vez) não está a declarar que essas pessoas são excelentes, isto é, muito virtuosas, está simplesmente a cumprir uma formalidade.

No entanto, tendo em consideração o impacto que a publicitação de tais condecorações tem na opinião pública, alheia a estas burocracias curiais, não se pode deixar de reconhecer que a sua importância é enorme como agora se verifica para grande escândalo dos fiéis. As repercussões culturais, políticas e religiosas desta notícia podem ser devastadoras. Por isso, os termos em que a nota da condecoração a Cavaco foi redigida é a todos os títulos lamentável. Os funcionários burocratas da cúria, e sabe Deus se com a cumplicidade ou não de algum Bispo espertalhaço cá do sítio, prestaram um péssimo serviço ao Santo Padre, à Igreja e a Portugal. De facto, como é possível que ignorassem o historial político do presidente? E se não é possível ignorá-lo com arranjaram uma condecoração naqueles termos? Alguém quer muito mal ao Papa.

Nuno Serras Pereira

28. 08. 2010

---

[1] http://aeiou.expresso.pt/a-primeira-pagina-do-expresso=f601099

Doctor Nicolosi: «Es posible dejar la vida gay cuando descubres que en esos sufrimientos hay causas emotivas

In ReligiónenLibertad.com

Joseph Nicolosi es psiquiatra desde hace varios años y trabaja la llamada terapia reparativa de la homosexualidad; es cofundador y director de la Asociación Nacional para la Investigación y la Terapia de la homosexualidad (NARTH), miembro de la Asociación Psicológica Americana, autor de numerosos libros y artículos científicos. Su último libro publicado en España se titula: «Quiero dejar de ser homosexual» (Ediciones Encuentro).

- Doctor Nicolosi, ¿qué es la homosexualidad?
- La homosexualidad es un síntoma de un problema emotivo y representa necesidades emotivas insatisfechas desde la infancia, especialmente en la relación con el progenitor del mismo sexo. En otras palabras: para el chico que no ha tenido una conexión emotiva con el padre, y para la chica que no ha tenido atención emotiva por parte de la madre, ello puede inducirles a desarrollar un síntoma de atracción hacia el propio sexo, u homosexualidad.

- ¿La homosexualidad es «normal»? ¿Y qué es normal?
- Yo no pienso que la homosexualidad sea normal. La población homosexual es alrededor del 2%, 1.5% - 2%. Por tanto estadísticamente no es “normal” en el sentido que esté muy extendida. Además de esto, no es normal tampoco en términos de natural designio. Cuando hablamos de ley natural, y de la función del cuerpo humano. Cuando miramos la función del cuerpo humano, la homosexualidad no es normal. Es un síntoma de algún desorden. La normalidad es aquello que cumple una función conforme al propio designio; éste es el concepto de ley natural – y en este sentido la homosexualidad no puede ser normal, porque la anatomía de dos hombres, los cuerpos de dos hombres, o dos mujeres, no son compatibles.

- ¿Cuáles son las causas de la homosexualidad? ¿Y existe una causa genética?
- Como he dicho, las causas de la homosexualidad se remontan a la autopercepción del niño o de la niña en la primera infancia. El chico necesita de una relación con su padre para desarrollar su substancial identidad masculina, la chica necesita de una unión emotiva o relación con su madre para desarrollar su feminidad. Es el sentido del género que determina la orientación sexual; en otras palabras, cuando un chico se siente seguro de su masculinidad, se siente naturalmente atraído por las mujeres. Y la misma cosa es cierta para las mujeres: cuando una joven chica se siente segura de su identidad femenina, se sentirá naturalmente atraída por los chicos. El homosexual es una persona que carece del sentido de género, y por ello trata de remediar, o busca un remedio a través de otras personas. Esta inclinación se hace sexualizada, y es por ello que manifiestan el síntoma de la homosexualidad.

Se habla mucho de las causas genéticas de la homosexualidad y más o menos hace veinte años en los Estados Unidos se hablaba en continuación del «gen gay», o de «cerebro gay», pero ningún estudio ha demostrado tal cosa. De hecho los activistas gay en los Estados Unidos ya no hablan tanto de bases biológicas o genéticas, porque ningún estudio lo ha demostrado y ha ofrecido tal confirmación. Son mucho más evidentes las causas familiares y ambientales, especialmente aquélla que llamamos la «clásica relación triádica» constituida por el chico con un padre distanciado y crítico, por una madre hiper-involucrada, intrusiva y a veces dominante y por un chico constitucionalmente sensible, introvertido y refinado que está expuesto a un riesgo mayor de sentirse falto en la identidad sexual. Nosotros vemos este esquema continuamente.

Nosotros reconocemos que en muchas personas hay una predisposición constitucional a la homosexualidad, pero es una cosa distinta a la pre-determinación, o a una “causa” directa. Esto es, el chico puede ser constitucionalmente proclive a la homosexualidad, en los términos de su constitución pasiva o delicada, y en su dificultad en crear un vínculo con el padre y en sentirse confiado para con el mundo masculino, pero es necesaria la “clásica relación triádica” ambiental para crear un problema homosexual a un chico con esta constitución.

- ¿Cuál es la diferencia entre “gay” y “homosexual”?
- Es esencial hacer esta importante distinción entre gay y homosexuales. Los activistas gay querrían que nosotros creyésemos que todos los homosexuales son gay. De hecho, incluso la jerarquía de la Iglesia católica cree que las personas homosexuales sean «gay». Nosotros no creemos que ellos sean gay. La palabra «gay» indica una identidad socio-política. Homosexual, en cambio, es simplemente una descripción de un problema psicológico, de una orientación sexual.

Las personas que vienen a nuestra clínica, que buscan una ayuda, tienen un problema homosexual, pero rechazan la etiqueta de gay. No quieren ser llamados “gay” porque no se reconocen en aquella identidad socio-política y con el estilo de vida gay.

- ¿El movimiento gay es un movimiento para los derechos humanos?
- Desde un cierto punto de vista lo es, es un movimiento para los derechos humanos, o para los derechos civiles, porque todas las personas, no importa cual sea su orientación sexual, tienen que disfrutar de los derechos civiles – de todos modos ello no significa que la sociedad deba redefinir el matrimonio; ésto es otro argumento que va más allá del objetivo de esta conversación.

Nosotros creemos que muchos activistas gay han usado la cuestión de los derechos civiles o de las libertades civiles como una manera para oprimir personas que están tratando de cambiar, personas que están tratando de salir de la homosexualidad. Hay una población entera de individuos que han salido o que están saliendo de la homosexualidad, y este hecho es una amenaza para los activistas gay, y los activistas gay están tratando de suprimir y silenciar este punto de vista, esta población.

Infelicidad, depresión, suicidio...
- Los investigadores dicen que los homosexuales sufren mucho. ¿La causa de este sufrimiento es la homosexualidad o la homofobia social?
- Nosotros creemos que hay sufrimiento para las personas homosexualmente orientadas en la sociedad, porque la cultura gay es minoritaria en esta sociedad y porque los objetivos sociales del movimiento gay constituyen una amenaza para el cuerpo social porque los gay quieren redefinir el matrimonio, la naturaleza de la paternidad, y la norma social fundamental acerca del género y del sexo, por ello la sociedad ha resistido a la normalización de la homosexualidad y a la visibilidad de los gay. Y reconocemos que ello sea difícil para las personas que se identifican como gay.

De todos modos, de lo que no se habla es del desorden intrínseco en la condición homosexual. Nosotros creemos que la homosexualidad sea intrínsecamente desordenada, y contraria a la verdadera identidad del individuo; y muchos de los síntomas de los que sufren las personas gay y lesbianas no son causados por la homofobia social sino porque la condición misma es contraria a su verdadera naturaleza.

Muchísimos estudios demuestran que los homosexuales son más infelices, depresivos, predispuestos a los intentos de suicidio, tienen relaciones pobres, son incapaces de mantener relaciones a largo plazo, tienen comportamientos autolesionistas e inadaptados. Pero no se puede simplísticamente decir que todo ello esté causado por la homofobia de la sociedad. En parte lo es; pero yo creo que la mayor parte de los sufrimientos se deba a la naturaleza desordenada de la misma homosexualidad – porque se opone a nuestra naturaleza humana.

- ¿El cambio es posible?
- El cambio es realmente posible. Nosotros vemos cada vez más individuos que quieren dar un paso al frente y dar su testimonio. Hace cinco años hubiera sido muy difícil encontrar un ex homosexual que quisiera exponerse, pero felizmente hoy hombres y mujeres que eran declaradamente gay y lesbianas, que vivian un estilo de vida gay, ahora quieren discutir abiertamente de su proceso de cambio. Muchos de ellos están casados con niños, y les habían dicho que no tenían otra opción que ser gay, y que tenían un gen de la homosexualidad, y que tenían que aprender a aceptarlo, pero estas personas han sido capaces de ir a fondo en las causas de su atracción hacia el propio sexo. Y entonces han descubierto que muchos de sus sufrimientos eran debidos a causas emotivas. Y cuando estas necesidades han sido reconocidas honradamente y satisfechas de manera sana, su deseo homosexual ha disminuido.

Hay un camino para salir de la homosexualidad
- ¿Qué es la terapia reparativa?
- La terapia reparativa es un particular tipo de psicoterapia que es aplicada a los individuos que quieren superar su atracción homosexual. Es una terapia particular que mira a los orígenes y a las causas de esta condición, que ayuda al cliente a comprenderse, enseñándole a entender qué ha ocurrido en su infancia, a entender los sucesos particulares que le han ocurrido, especialmente en los términos de las relaciones con su madre y con su padre, y a ir más allá de todo ello, a apoyar al cliente en crear aquellas nuevas relaciones que son sanas, que son benéficas, y que compensan el vacío emotivo que se ha creado en su desarrollo.

La terapia reparativa estudia realmente a fondo las técnicas que son más eficaces para disminuir la homosexualidad de una persona y a desarrollar su potencial heterosexual.

- ¿Cuáles son las bases teóricas de la terapia reparativa?
- Fundamentalmente la terapia reparativa comienza, teóricamente, con la terapia psicodinámica, esto es, aquella que estudia las fuerzas subconscientes que gobiernan el comportamiento de las personas.

Desde el punto de vista teórico nosotros creemos que las necesidades emocionales no satisfechas se expriman indirectamente bajo forma de síntomas, y en el caso de la homosexualidad como atracción homosexual; pero que la homosexualidad no afecte realmente al sexo, cuanto más bien el intento de adquirir satisfacciones emotivas e identificación, complemento, a través del comportamiento homosexual; intento que sin embargo no funciona, y es ésta la razón por la que las personas vienen a buscarnos.

Muchos de los desarrollos teóricos están basados en la teoría psicodinámica clásica: nosotros usamos muchos conceptos freudianos – como es notorio, Freud pensaba que la homosexualidad fuera un desorden del desarrollo, y que fuera una condición que podía someterse a tratamiento. Aunque el mismo Freud fuera un defensor de los derechos de los gay, creía que el tratamiento tenía que estar disponible para aquellos que querían cambiar, y nosotros seguimos la misma línea de tradición.

Nosotros usamos también muchas de las “teorías del apego” de John Bowlby, de aquella de las relaciones objetuales y de la self-psychology, muy popular en los Estados Unidos. Nosotros trabajamos también con la familia de origen, ayudando al paciente a entender sus relaciones con su familia, y su papel en la familia, y cómo el sitio ocupado por él en la estructura familiar lo ha conducido al fracaso en la adquisición del propio género”.

Reportagem em diferentes paises com testemunhos sobre o aborto

Ver: http://www.agencia.ecclesia.pt/cgi-bin/media.pl?tipo=videos

Archbishop Chaput: "Systematic Discrimination Against Church Now Seems Inevitable"

SPISSKE, PODHRADIE, Slovakia, August 25, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - MUST READ Excerpts from Denver Archbishop Charles Chaput's address to the 15th symposium for the Canon Law Association of Slovakia on Tuesday:

Today's secularizers have learned from the past. They are more adroit in their bigotry; more elegant in their public relations; more intelligent in their work to exclude the Church and individual believers from influencing the moral life of society. Over the next several decades, Christianity will become a faith that can speak in the public square less and less freely. A society where faith is prevented from vigorous public expression is a society that has fashioned the state into an idol. And when the state becomes an idol, men and women become the sacrificial offering.

We face an aggressively secular political vision and a consumerist economic model that result - in practice, if not in explicit intent -- in a new kind of state-encouraged atheism.

To put it another way: The Enlightenment-derived worldview that gave rise to the great murder ideologies of the last century remains very much alive. Its language is softer, its intentions seem kinder, and its face is friendlier. But its underlying impulse hasn't changed -- i.e., the dream of building a society apart from God; a world where men and women might live wholly sufficient unto themselves, satisfying their needs and desires through their own ingenuity.

This vision presumes a frankly "post-Christian" world ruled by rationality, technology and good social engineering. Religion has a place in this worldview, but only as an individual lifestyle accessory. People are free to worship and believe whatever they want, so long as they keep their beliefs to themselves and do not presume to intrude their religious idiosyncrasies on the workings of government, the economy, or culture.

Now, at first hearing, this might sound like a reasonable way to organize a modern society that includes a wide range of ethnic, religious and cultural traditions, different philosophies of life and approaches to living.

… how does the rhetoric of enlightened, secular tolerance square with the actual experience of faithful Catholics in Europe and North America in recent years?

In the United States, a nation that is still 80 percent Christian with a high degree of religious practice, government agencies now increasingly seek to dictate how Church ministries should operate, and to force them into practices that would destroy their Catholic identity. Efforts have been made to discourage or criminalize the expression of certain Catholic beliefs as "hate speech." Our courts and legislatures now routinely take actions that undermine marriage and family life, and seek to scrub our public life of Christian symbolism and signs of influence.

In Europe, we see similar trends, although marked by a more open contempt for Christianity. Church leaders have been reviled in the media and even in the courts for simply expressing Catholic teaching.

The West is now steadily moving in the direction of that new "inhuman humanism." And if the Church is to respond faithfully, we need to draw upon the lessons that your Churches learned under totalitarianism.

A Catholicism of resistance must be based on trust in Christ's words: "The truth will make you free."

Living within the truth means living according to Jesus Christ and God's Word in Sacred Scripture. It means proclaiming the truth of the Christian Gospel, not only by our words but by our example. It means living every day and every moment from the unshakeable conviction that God lives, and that his love is the motive force of human history and the engine of every authentic human life. It means believing that the truths of the Creed are worth suffering and dying for.

Living within the truth also means telling the truth and calling things by their right names. And that means exposing the lies by which some men try to force others to live.

Our societies in the West are Christian by birth, and their survival depends on the endurance of Christian values. Our core principles and political institutions are based, in large measure, on the morality of the Gospel and the Christian vision of man and government. We are talking here not only about Christian theology or religious ideas. We are talking about the moorings of our societies -- representative government and the separation of powers; freedom of religion and conscience; and most importantly, the dignity of the human person.

…we cannot dispense with our history out of some superficial concern over offending our non-Christian neighbors. Notwithstanding the chatter of the "new atheists," there is no risk that Christianity will ever be forced upon people anywhere in the West. The only "confessional states" in the world today are those ruled by Islamist or atheist dictatorships -- regimes that have rejected the Christian West's belief in individual rights and the balance of powers.

I would argue that the defense of Western ideals is the only protection that we and our neighbors have against a descent into new forms of repression -- whether it might be at the hands of extremist Islam or secularist technocrats.

But indifference to our Christian past contributes to indifference about defending our values and institutions in the present. And this brings me to the second big lie by which we live today -- the lie that there is no unchanging truth.

Relativism is now the civil religion and public philosophy of the West. Again, the arguments made for this viewpoint can seem persuasive. Given the pluralism of the modern world, it might seem to make sense that society should want to affirm that no one individual or group has a monopoly on truth; that what one person considers to be good and desirable another may not; and that all cultures and religions should be respected as equally valid.

In practice, however, we see that without a belief in fixed moral principles and transcendent truths, our political institutions and language become instruments in the service of a new barbarism. In the name of tolerance we come to tolerate the cruelest intolerance; respect for other cultures comes to dictate disparagement of our own; the teaching of "live and let live" justifies the strong living at the expense of the weak.

This diagnosis helps us understand one of the foundational injustices in the West today -- the crime of abortion.

I realize that the abortion license is a matter of current law in almost every nation in the West. In some cases, this license reflects the will of the majority and is enforced through legal and democratic means. And I'm aware that many people, even in the Church, find it strange that we Catholics in America still make the sanctity of unborn life so central to our public witness.

Let me tell you why I believe abortion is the crucial issue of our age.

First, because abortion, too, is about living within the truth. The right to life is the foundation of every other human right. If that right is not inviolate, then no right can be guaranteed.

Or to put it more bluntly: Homicide is homicide, no matter how small the victim.

Here's another truth that many persons in the Church have not yet fully reckoned: The defense of newborn and preborn life has been a central element of Catholic identity since the Apostolic Age.

I'll say that again: From the earliest days of the Church, to be Catholic has meant refusing in any way to participate in the crime of abortion -- either by seeking an abortion, performing one, or making this crime possible through actions or inactions in the political or judicial realm. More than that, being Catholic has meant crying out against all that offends the sanctity and dignity of life as it has been revealed by Jesus Christ.

My point in mentioning abortion is this: Its widespread acceptance in the West shows us that without a grounding in God or a higher truth, our democratic institutions can very easily become weapons against our own human dignity.

Our most cherished values cannot be defended by reason alone, or simply for their own sake. They have no self-sustaining or "internal" justification.

There is no inherently logical or utilitarian reason why society should respect the rights of the human person. There is even less reason for recognizing the rights of those whose lives impose burdens on others, as is the case with the child in the womb, the terminally ill, or the physically or mentally disabled.

If human rights do not come from God, then they devolve to the arbitrary conventions of men and women. The state exists to defend the rights of man and to promote his flourishing. The state can never be the source of those rights. When the state arrogates to itself that power, even a democracy can become totalitarian.

What is legalized abortion but a form of intimate violence that clothes itself in democracy? The will to power of the strong is given the force of law to kill the weak.

That is where we are heading in the West today.

I suggested earlier that the Church's religious liberty is under assault today in ways not seen since the Nazi and Communist eras. I believe we are now in the position to better understand why.

Writing in the 1960s, Richard Weaver, an American scholar and social philosopher, said: "I am absolutely convinced that relativism must eventually lead to a regime of force."

He was right. There is a kind of "inner logic" that leads relativism to repression.

This explains the paradox of how Western societies can preach tolerance and diversity while aggressively undermining and penalizing Catholic life. The dogma of tolerance cannot tolerate the Church's belief that some ideas and behaviors should not be tolerated because they dehumanize us. The dogma that all truths are relative cannot allow the thought that some truths might not be.

The Catholic beliefs that most deeply irritate the orthodoxies of the West are those concerning abortion, sexuality and the marriage of man and woman. This is no accident. These Christian beliefs express the truth about human fertility, meaning and destiny.

These truths are subversive in a world that would have us believe that God is not necessary and that human life has no inherent nature or purpose. Thus the Church must be punished because, despite all the sins and weaknesses of her people, she is still the bride of Jesus Christ; still a source of beauty, meaning and hope that refuses to die -- and still the most compelling and dangerous heretic of the world's new order.

Link to full 12 page talk by Archbishop Chaput is http://www.archden.org/index.cfm/ID/4396

ACI Prensa presenta ensayo sobre realidad homosexual y los grupos de presión

REDACCIÓN CENTRAL, 25 Ago. 10 / 01:10 pm (ACI)

ACI Prensa pone a disposición de sus usuarios y público en general un extenso y crudo ensayo escrito por un ex homosexual que explica la complicada realidad, ocultada frecuentemente por los medios de comunicación secular, de quienes experimentan tendencias homosexuales.

El texto se titula "Los libros eran una pantalla para la pornografía" y ha sido escrito por Ronald G. Lee. Al proporcionar este texto, cuya crudeza puede herir sensibilidades, ACI Prensa ofrece una herramienta a quienes quieran comprender mejor este complejo tema ante el avance de legislaciones que promueven las uniones homosexuales e incluso la adopción de menores por parte de estas parejas.

Según se explica en la introducción, el ensayo "revela la realidad psicológica que anima a los grupos de presión homosexual. Al hacerlo relata hechos y prácticas con absoluta crudeza. El autor ha pedido que se respete la cruda y gráfica versión original, por ello, no recomendamos su lectura a quienes creen que la descripción de algunas prácticas homosexuales pueden ofenderle".

Para leer el ensayo ingrese a: http://www.aciprensa.com/Familia/homosex-libros.htm

Affirming Love/Avoiding AIDS

by William E. May, Ph.D., Senior Fellow

In Culture of Life Foundation

The “conventional wisdom” prevalent in the United States, European Nations, and the United Nations is that the best way to prevent HIV/AIDS in Africa (or anywhere, for that matter) is to practice “safe sex,” that is, to make use of condoms and other prophylactic devises. The Catholic Church is regularly criticized for its failure to urge the use of condoms and “safe sex” in Africa and is blamed for the AIDS “epidemic” in sub-Sahara Africa.

A new book, Affirming Love, Avoiding Aids: What Africa Can Teach the West, [1] recently published by the National Catholic Bioethics Center in Philadelphia, challenges this widely shared view. The authors of the book are Matthew Hanley and Jokin de Irala. Hanley was the HIV/AIDS technical advisor for Catholic Relief Services until 2008 and specialized in HIV prevention. Dr. de Irala is deputy director of the Department of Preventive Medicine and Public Health at the University of Navarra in Spain. The book carries a Foreword by Edward C. Green, Director of the AIDS Prevention Research Project at the Harvard Center for Population and Development Studies. [2]

Brief Synopsis of Book

The book, Hanley and Irala say, first presents “the relevant scientific data and only then examine(s) the Christian and other philosophical approaches to HIV prevention” (p. 5). Here I will first summarize the “relevant scientific data” and then look at “the Christian and other philosophical approaches to HIV prevention.”

Relevant scientific data

Thomas Flynn, L.C., has provided an overview of this book in the June 27, 2010 edition of Zenit and in doing so summarizes the “relevant data.” I now paraphrase that summary:

Early in the book Hanley and de Irala point out that "AIDS Establishment" (=conventional wisdom of the west) has concentrated on technical means rather than on behavioral change. The exception to this was the change in policy by the United States to adopt an ABC strategy following the success of Uganda in using this approach to deal with AIDS. The "A" stands for abstinence, "B" for be faithful, and "C" for condom use. The first two parts to this strategy are crucial. In Africa studies show that when a significant number of people are engaged in concurrent sexual relationships the chances of infection are much higher compared to communities where people reduce multiple partnerships. A decline in multiple sexual partnerships is crucial to bringing about a decline in HIV rates. The best example of this was in Uganda, where HIV infection rates dropped from 15% in 1991 to 5% in 2001. Kenya, Thailand and Haiti are additional countries that the authors refer to in citing evidence from studies that show how behavioral change leads to a reduction in the rates of HIV transmission. One reason behind the success in modifying conduct in Uganda was the work of Catholic nuns and doctors. Unfortunately in recent years the AIDS establishment has gained influence in Uganda and the emphasis has shifted toward promoting the use of condoms. This has been accompanied by an increase in HIV transmission.

By contrast, in South Africa, where promotion of condom use has been the main priority, the persistently high rates of multiple partnerships has helped to maintain the level of HIV infections at what the authors describe as an “alarmingly high incidence.”

Christian and other philosophical approaches

Chapter VI of Affirming Love, Avoiding AIDS, is entitled “The Christian Perspective.” It is a very long chapter, running from p. 105 to p. 159, and it includes on pp. 153-159 some 92 footnotes. Pages 105-125 are devoted to a very excellent critique of the relativism, utilitarianism, and emotivism of the AIDS Establishment. They also fault its anthropological understanding of human sexuality, one common to that Establishment and widely accepted in Western cultures today. According to this anthropology, the “person” is a consciously experiencing subject and his/her body is a tool for giving that subject the experience of pleasure. In short, it separates the “person” from his or her own body. From page 126 on the authors refer to a wide range of thinkers, including the great pre-Christian philosophers, e.g. Aristotle (see p. 125), who reduced the hedonistic “man is the measure of all things” ethics to absurdity, defended the dignity of marriage, and proposed an alternative understanding both of morality and human anthropology, including human sexuality. Among contemporary authors to whom they refer include most prominently Pope John Paul II (with his great book Love and Responsibility) and Elizabeth Anscombe, whose philosophical work brilliantly showed the superficiality of utilitarianism-hedonism and showed how human is the practice of celibate chastity prior to marriage and the practice of total fidelity to one’s spouse in marriage. They also refer to and cite from the persuasive and thought-provoking work of Anthony Fisher, O.P., a distinguished bioethicist and now a Bishop in Australia.

The authors emphasize that human sexuality permeates the being of the entire human person and is integral to his being and is not a mere accident or useful tool. They likewise affirm that it is ordered to two great goods: the good of marriage and of chaste spousal union in the marital act, and to the good of procreating new human life. The latter good, one might say in company with Pope John Paul II, is an “existential good” insofar as the continued existence of the human species depends on the generation of new human persons. Many studies show that children thrive best if generated by loving husbands and wives than if engendered by persons who are not married or “made” in laboratories by “new reproductive technologies.”

Citing Rev. Tadeusz Pacholzyck on p. 41 they write that a husband who finds out he has HIV (perhaps as a result of a blood transfusion) will not, if he loves his wife, have genital sex with her nor would he trust a condom to protect her. [3]

They do not, however, in this chapter or elsewhere in their work, go into great detail in rehabilitating, as it were, the meaning of the virtue of chastity, which is, we need to keep in mind, an integral component of the cardinal virtue of temperance, whose other components are concerned with moderating our legitimate desires for food and drink.

Recently I directed a graduate study (S.T.L., or Licentiate in Sacred Theology, a canonical degree higher than an M.A. but not as high as a Ph.D.or S.T.D.) by a student, Andrew Amaruma, a native of Uganda, whose study showed that the tradition of the Madi tribe, to which he belonged, emphasized virginity prior to marriage for both males and female and fidelity in marriage. This tribe experienced little AIDS until, under pressure from the UN and USAIDS, it began to promote condom use and also to preach that consensual sex, whether between husband and wife, unmarried males and females, members of the same sex etc. was perfectly all right and that the traditional “taboos” against promiscuity were rooted in a false understanding of human sexuality and human needs.

This in my opinion shows how accurate Stephen Moser was in his Population Control: Real Costs, Illusory Benefits, [4] in which Mosher shows (pp. 174-194) that the AIDS Establishment claim that the recent epidemic of HIV/AIDS in Africa is utterly without basis and that the real cause of most cases of AIDS is use of infected needles for injections, because funding of basic health care has tumbled while funding of antifertility programs has increased; injections by infected needles into women of contraceptives such as Dopo-Provera are among leading causes (pp. 174-194).

Conclusion

Hanley and de Irala’s work, which needs to be widely known, demonstrates that the Euro-American plan for preventing AIDS by accepting and even encouraging high risk behavior and by relying on technical means for stemming epidemics of HIV/AIDS has failed miserably whereas programs fostering virginity prior to marriage and fidelity in marriage have and can
effectively prevent the spread of a terrible disease.

__

Notes
1. Philadelphia: National Catholic Bioethics Center, 2010, xxii+202 pp. ISBN978-0-935372-56-4.
2. In his Foreword Green emphasizes that “the global response to AIDS was developed in the US (with some help from Europe) for the type of ‘concentrated’ AIDS epidemics found in America and Europe. We then attempted to apply Euro-European solutions to problems in Africa…and indeed the rest of the world….The Euro-American approach has its flaws” (xii-xiii). “HIV in the United States…has certainly risen in recent years among homosexual men… an approach that may fit prostitutes or drug addicts or homosexuals—which is based ultimately on the self-defeating premise that the risk behavior cannot (or even should) be changed—will probably not be the best approach for married couples or most teenagers. After all, the majority of non-married teenagers in less developed countries are not sexually active, to go by our best behavioral surveys” (xiii). “In every African country where HIV infections have declined, this decline is associated with a decrease in the proportion of men and women reporting more than one sex partner, which is exactly what fidelity programs promote” (xiii-xiv).
3. On this point I, with others, disagree with Father Pacholzyck. We are not sure that in all cases a husband with HIV should permanently abstain from non-condomistic intercourse with his wife. Since intercourse allows a couple to realize and experience a unique good of marriage, it seems to some theologians faithful to the Magisterium that it could be legitimate for both spouses to agree to have intercourse and accept as a side-effect the harm that might come about if HIV is passed on. We do not say this is always justifiable, but we do not judge it intrinsically evil.
4. New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers, 2008, x+300 pp. $29.95.

Miles de jóvenes plantan cara a la «farsa» de la Conferencia Mundial de la Juventud de la ONU

Denuncian la falta de auténtica representatividad del foro y que su agenda contra la vida y la familia está ya impuesta en «conclusiones prefabricadas». Leer más

99 Percent of Music Chart Hit Acts are “Soft Porn” Says Music Industry Giant

By Hilary White

LONDON, August 20, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) – While religious leaders have been warning about the moral effects of the modern pop music scene for decades, now even some leaders of the industry are expressing their concern. Today record producer Mike Stock told British media that he believes children are being “sexualized” by popular culture.

“The music industry has gone too far. It's not about me being old fashioned. It's about keeping values that are important in the modern world. These days you can't watch modern stars - like Britney Spears or Lady Gaga - with a two-year-old.”

“Ninety-nine per cent of the charts is R 'n' B and 99 per cent of that is soft pornography,” he added.

Stock is one of the trio of “legendary” music producers that constitute Stock Aitken Waterman, whose talent properties have included Cliff Richard, Debbie Harry, Donna Summer, La Toya Jackson and Kylie Minogue. The trio was one of the most successful songwriting and producing partnerships in the history of the music business, with more than 100 UK top 40 hits, and earning an estimated £60 million.

Stock told the Daily Mail, “Kids are being forced to grow up too young. Look at the videos. I wouldn't necessarily want my young kids to watch them. I would certainly be embarrassed to sit there with my mum.”

In Britain the “Hit Parade,” the first British record sales chart at the dawn of the popular music era, was published in November 1952, and was measured by sales of sheet music. The first number 1 song on Britain’s Hit Parade was “Here in My Heart” by Al Martino, the Italian-American “pop crooner” and actor who is also known for his portrayal of the character Johnny Fontane in the 1972 film The Godfather.

This week, BBC Radio 1 reported that the number one UK spot was held by American rapper Tramar Dillard, better known by his stage name “Flo Rida,” for his rap piece “Club Can’t Handle Me.” The number, performed largely on two notes of the musical scale, includes a video in which a frenzied mob of night-clubbers burst out of the club and into the streets, destroying a corner shop to end up gyrating in a laundromat.

Lady Gaga’s widely criticized single, “Alejandro,” has fallen on the charts this week to number 22. The video features Lady Gaga, shown in scanty underwear and a mock nun’s habit, simulating sado-maochistic sex and swallowing a rosary. It also shows a team of semi-nude male dancers performing mock homosexual acts, themes that are so common they are starting to be considered passé in British pop culture.

“Before children even step into school, they have all these images - the pop videos and computer games like Grand Theft Auto - confronting them and the parents can't control it,” Stock continued.

He has responded to the concerns of parents by producing what he has called a “family-orientated show.” The Go! Go! Go! Show is a pop song and dance show performed by “tween” singers that is playing to positive reviews in London.

Brian Clowes, the research director for the pro-life and pro-family group Human Life International, expressed surprise that there is anyone left who “doesn’t believe that the music industry degrades morals, sexualizes young girls and is disrespectful to women.”

Such people, he told LSN, “should just visit YouTube and randomly select a half-dozen music videos to watch.”

“There are only a handful of artists who even attempt to promote good moral values, since this is considered ‘uncool’ and, even more importantly, unprofitable. Many of the singers target pre-teen girls with their messages, and then these girls follow the advice and lyrics they hear and wind up ruining their lives,” Clowes commented.

“It's true that we are not forced to watch this trash; but we are also responsible for making sure our kids grow up holy, healthy and happy. If they follow music videos and shows, they will be zero for three.”

Mexico City Governor Seeks Punitive Action against Cardinal for 'Homophobia'

By Matthew Cullinan Hoffman, Latin America Correspondent

MEXICO CITY, August 19, 2010 (LifeSiteNews.com) - Mexico City Chief of Government Marcelo Ebrard and other members of his party have filed complaints against several representatives of the Catholic Church in Mexico for "homophobia" and "moral damage" following criticisms of the city's new homosexual "marriage" and adoption laws.

The complaints stem from comments made earlier this week by Cardinal Juan Sandoval Iñiguez, accusing Ebrard and international pro-abortion groups of "feeding" (i.e. bribing) nine Supreme Court justices who voted to approve homosexual "marriage" as constitutional, and to impose it on all of Mexico's 31 states.

Diocesan spokesman Fr. Hugo Valdemar is also being charged along with Sandoval Iñiguez, apparently for his recent statements accusing Ebrard of creating "laws that are destructive to the family, that cause worse damage than narcotrafficking." In addition, a complaint has been filed against the Cardinal Archbishop of Mexico City, Norberto Rivera Carrera, for reasons unstated in the Mexican media.

Ebrard and his political allies are making their complaints in a variety of agencies and courts, picking venues inside of socialist-dominated Mexico City itself as well as left-leaning federal organisms that will be more likely to rule in his favor. They include the Superior Court of Justice of Mexico City, the Human Rights Commission of the Federal District, the National Commission to Prevent Discrimination, and the Federal Electoral Institute. The cases could last five months or longer.

However, Sandoval Íñiguez and Valdemar remain defiant. The cardinal has continued his refusal to retract his statements, as demanded by Ebrard, while Valdemar has responded to the charges by denouncing the "new religious persecution" motivated by "intolerance, hatred, and viscerality" which could "unleash a war in the country." He defends his comparison to the drug trade by noting that, while the war with narcotraffickers has caused 28,000 deaths so far, the legalization of abortion has caused the deaths of 42,000 unborn children.

"For that reason I said that his laws were pernicious, perverse, and do worse damage than organized crime. I don't have anything more to demonstrate, that is what I affirm and maintain it using information from his (Ebrard's) own government," Valdemar said.

Previous LifeSiteNews coverage:

Cardinal Has Proof Mexican Justices Were Bribed for Gay 'Marriage' Vote: Archdiocese
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/aug/10081801.html

Mexican Cardinal Accuses Supreme Court Justices of Taking Bribes for Gay ‘Marriage’ Vote
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/aug/10081701.html

Homosexual 'Marriage' Advocates Seek to Destroy Matrimony and Society Itself: Cardinal Archbishop of Mexico City
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/aug/10081013.html

Mexican Supreme Court Imposes Homosexual 'Marriage" on Entire Country
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/aug/10081003.html

Mexican Supreme Court Rejects Lawsuits against Capital's Gay 'Marriage' Law
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/feb/10022401.html

Las logias masónicas y el poder - por Luigi Negri

In ReligiónenLibertad.com

La masonería tiene una raíz cristiana. El filósofo francés Jean Guitton, en su libro «Le Christ écartelé», sitúa su raíz allí donde se encuentra la madre de todas las herejías: la gnosis. La corriente gnóstica, que reaparece cíclicamente, consiste en el intento de leer el evento cristiano en el seno de una estructura cultural y filosófica, más que en aceptar que el evento de Cristo juzgue la razón y por tanto module la conciencia de un modo distinto. En las raíces de la moderna masonería está este fermento radical de la gnosis. La gnosis hace pensar en algunos seres «iluminados», o poseedores de la «adecuada» interpretación del cristianismo, que ya no será un hecho, sino un mensaje, y por tanto, algo esencialmente interpretable. La verdad del cristianismo, por tanto, según la herejía gnóstica, consiste en la verdad de la interpretación, y sobre ésta radica una proyección de tipo moralista, que los cátaros y los valdenses ya han repropuesto continuamente en el corazón de la cristiandad occidental.

Esta imagen gnóstica, y por tanto moralista, del cristianismo marca toda la historia de la cristiandad, también la occidental. Pero la marca de una manera minoritaria; es una realidad que no consigue forzar la unitariedad de la cultura y de la civilización de la Edad Media, porque siendo un fenómeno de tipo sustancialmente intelectual y religioso, en el sentido estricto de la palabra, no tiene la fuerza de convertirse en una alternativa a la grandiosidad del proceso católico de inculturación de la fe, de creación de una civilización como la medieval. Y cuando surge la masonería, se convierte en un hecho explícito, en un factor promotor de un cierto tipo de descristianización de la vida social, tanto en Europa como en el Nuevo Mundo.

Antropología del poder

La antropología cristiana nace del advenimiento de Cristo, que es gracia, y se confía a la libertad, porque la gracia se dirige a la libertad, considera la libertad como la gran destinataria de su presencia. Lo sentimos por Lutero y sus secuaces, pero la gracia no elimina la libertad, sino que la promueve, exactamente igual que el abrazo del padre o la madre no ahogan la personalidad de los hijos sino que la invitan a que se haga responsable. Esta es la antropología cristiana, una antropología, por tanto, que no tiene necesidad de negar el mal, ni de negar el bien, que no necesita subrayar el aspecto permeable de las estructuras en las que el hombre vive su propia vida y que ciertamente lo condicionan, pero que ve cómo el hombre emerge de su ser hijo de Dios, porque esta filiación divina es revelada y hecha experiencia por el advenimiento de Cristo reconocido por la efusión de su espíritu. Y hemos visto cómo durante siglos, dentro de la tradición católica de Occidente, se ha realizado esta antropología. La masonería retoma o reasume una responsabilidad enorme, desde el punto de vista cultural y social, cuando cambia realmente el escenario de la antropología; cuando a la antropología de la verdad le sustituye la antropología del poder.

La antropología de la verdad encuentra su cumplimiento en la revelación cristiana y su ámbito de educación y de experiencia en la pertenencia al pueblo de Dios, que es la Iglesia, fuente de madurez de las personalidades individuales: la Iglesia tiene como objetivo supremo no la ampliación de su estructura institucional, sino el crecimiento del pueblo cristiano, «sacramenta propter homines» («los sacramentos son para nosotros»), decían nuestros antiguos maestros escolásticos: en su gravedad ontológica decían que la Iglesia está para la educación del hombre, para que el hombre, una vez maduro en su identidad cristiana, asuma la responsabilidad de ser misionero en el mundo, ante Cristo y ante los hombres. Éste es también el gran grito que llega desde la encíclica «Novo millenio ineunte» de Juan Pablo II.

La antropología de la persona, que es persona porque pertenece a Cristo en su pueblo, es sustituida por la del individuo que tiene ya valor en sí mismo y por sí mismo. El corazón del masón pertenece a la modernidad, y la modernidad es la construcción de un mundo sin Dios. Y en la masonería, para construir un mundo sin Dios se puede hablar de Dios, es más, se debe hablar de Dios, porque sería un absoluto despropósito, algo estratégicamente incorrecto hablar mal de Él o decir que no existe.

El hombre, alternativa a Dios

Pero evidentemente, sobre el plano del derecho, sobre el plano teórico, sobre el plano de la impostación filosófica y antropológica, el hombre es concebido como la alternativa a Dios. La masonería se radica en este nuevo ambiente en el que madura en sinergia con los filones racionalistas e ilustrados, que serán más rigurosamente antideístas y anticatólicos y donde no hay lugar para una concepción religiosa de la vida que radique al hombre en la pregunta de sentido, de verdad, de belleza y de justicia, porque este tipo de preguntas son sustancialmente alienantes.

La masonería está, por tanto, en el seno del laicismo moderno y contemporáneo, y comparte con el laicismo moderno la gran preocupación de construir un mundo como si Dios no existiese; quizá no formalmente contra Dios, sino como si Dios no existiese. Creo que éstos son los elementos de enfrentamiento. Creo que todos nosotros tenemos el derecho de ser lo que somos, de elegir nuestras opciones, de ser coherentes con nuestros principios, de realizar en la vida social una expresión también pública, de nuestras convicciones, pero es necesario que sepamos lo que está en juego. Y está en juego una alternativa en el plano de la antropología: o existe el hombre de la verdad o existe el hombre del poder, desde el punto de vista de la definición última.


Luigi Negri, obispo de la diócesis de San Marino-Montefeltro (Italia)