Por Quatro Vezes a Igreja Católica discutiu Comunhão para Divorciados, mas Cristo "shut it down"

Pois é, não é de hoje que tentam dentro da Igreja Católica diminuir a importância do sacramento da comunhão e do sacramento do casamento. 

Marc Rezac, no Catholic News Agency, fala de um artigo que traça a histórico das tentativa de permitir que divorciados que se casaram novamente possa receber comunhão. O texto é Nicholas Healy. Mas Rezac faz um resumo das quatro tentativas.

Sempre que se tentou, a Igreja (ouvindo Cristo) acabou "shut it down". Fiquei pensando em uma tradução fidedigna para esta expressão. Mas não encontrei. Significa algo como: abandonou isso, largou isso, parou com isso.

Vejamos o relato das quatro vezes. É um ótimo relato:

1. 1965 and Vatican II: The argument for allowing communion in certain circumstances to divorced and remarried Catholics can be traced back, at least in recent history, to the fourth session of the Second Vatican Council. Archbishop Elias Zoghby, the patriarchal vicar of the Melkites in Egypt, proposed that the Eastern practice of tolerating remarriage in certain cases should be considered. Even though Zobhby triggered a swift and negative response, dissenters still use this instance as an example in their favor.

Shut it down: At the request of Pope Paul VI, all normal activities of the Council were suspended until the proposal was addressed. Cardinal Journet was asked by the Pope to respond to Zoghby, and citing Mk 10:2 and 1 Cor 7:10–11, he concluded that “the teaching of the Catholic Church on the indissolubility of sacramental marriage is the very teaching of the Lord Jesus that has been revealed to us and has always been safeguarded and proclaimed in the Church . . . the Church has no authority to change what is of divine law.”

2. 1970s: Despite the Church’s response at the Second Vatican Council, the 1970s saw a barrage of publications from Catholic theologians and bishops advocating for a change in Church teaching, particularly in the United States and in Germany. In 1972, a study committee commissioned by the Catholic Theological Society of America issued an “Interim Pastoral Statement” on “The Problem of Second Marriages,” arguing that not only should the divorced and remarried be admitted back to the sacraments, but that the Church needed to rethink and redefine the very ideas of consummation and indissolubility. That same year in Germany, several prominent bishops and theologians such as Schnackenburg, Ratzinger*, Lehmann, and Böckle wrote volumes on the matter, arguing for leniency in certain circumstances similar to practices in the Orthodox Church (called oikonomia, which roughly translates to “stewardship” or “management of a household”).

*Cardinal Ratzinger, now Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI, officially retracted his support of communion for the divorced and remarried in a letter published in The Tablet in 1991, and has several times since voiced his support for Church teaching as expressed in “Familiaris Consortio”.

Shut it down: The Church holds a Synod on the Family in 1980, as divorces were on the rise throughout the world. The result of the 1980 Synod was Pope John Paul II’s 1981 apostolic exhortation “Familiaris Consortio”(roughly, “Of Family Partnership”), which contains beautiful reflections on the role of the family in God’s divine plan, and specifically includes a section about irregular situations. Addressing the situation of the divorced and civilly remarried, Pope John Paul II says the following:

Together with the Synod, I earnestly call upon pastors and the whole community of the faithful to help the divorced, and with solicitous care to make sure that they do not consider themselves as separated from the Church, for as baptized persons they can, and indeed must, share in her life. They should be encouraged to listen to the word of God, to attend the Sacrifice of the Mass, to persevere in prayer, to contribute to works of charity and to community efforts in favor of justice, to bring up their children in the Christian faith, to cultivate the spirit and practice of penance and thus implore, day by day, God’s grace. Let the Church pray for them, encourage them and show herself a merciful mother, and thus sustain them in faith and hope.

However, the Church reaffirms her practice, which is based upon Sacred Scripture, of not admitting to Eucharistic Communion divorced persons who have remarried. They are unable to be admitted thereto from the fact that their state and condition of life objectively contradict that union of love between Christ and the Church which is signified and effected by the Eucharist. Besides this, there is another special pastoral reason: if these people were admitted to the Eucharist, the faithful would be led into error and confusion regarding the Church’s teaching about the indissolubility of marriage.

3. 1993: Three prominent German bishops, Oskar Saier, Walter Kasper, and Karl Lehmann, publish a letter on pastoral care for the divorced and remarried, essentially saying that while what Pope John Paul II said in Familiaris Consortio is very nice and generally true, it can’t possibly apply to every difficult situation that arises. These bishops then proposed their own guide for divorced and remarried Catholics to determine their worthiness for the sacraments, as guided by a pastor. There were three conditions the German bishops laid out for the possibility of communion: the individuals should be repentant for the failure of the first marriage; the second civil marriage has to “prove itself over time as stable”; and the “commitments assumed in the second marriage have to be accepted.” Under these conditions, the bishops argued, civilly remarried people could in good conscience receive the Eucharist without the need to live continently.

Shut it down: In 1994, The Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith issued an indirect response to the German bishops in the “Letter Concerning Communion”, which said church teaching “cannot be modified for difficult situations.” While it never mentioned the letter from the German bishops, it was clearly written in response to it. The Congregation’s letter cited passages from Scripture, Familiaris Consortio, and the Catechism of the Catholic Church to support Church teaching, and addressed false notions of conscience that would allow individuals to determine for themselves whether or not their first marriage was valid.

4. 1994-2005: Literature published by various bishops and theologians still showed a tendency to stray from Pope John Paul II’s teaching in “Familiaris Consortio”, leading the Church to call for a Synod on the Eucharist in 2005, during which the issue was studied and addressed extensively.

Shut it down: Pope Benedict XVI issued a post-Synod apostolic exhortation called “Sacramentum Caritatis”, in which he confirmed Church doctrine and practice. He also called for a deeper theological understanding of the relationship between the sacrament of marriage and the sacrament of the Eucharist, and asked for better pastoral efforts in the area of marriage preparation for young people.

There are two important things to remember when considering this issue. The first is that the pain and separation felt by divorced and remarried Catholics is real, and the exhortation of the recent Popes to reach out to these people in the Church should be taken seriously by clergy and lay faithful alike. The second thing to remember is that while the pain of the divorced and remarried is a serious issue, it is not the only important and pressing issue in the Church at the moment, with thousands of Christians fleeing their homes or being slaughtered at the hands of Islamic extremists both in the Middle East and Africa.

Still, because the issue continues to arise, the Synod Fathers will address it at the Synod on the Family later this year, and Pope Francis will write an apostolic exhortation on the matter some time after that. Let us continue to pray for all in Church leadership, and that those in authority have the courage to trust that the Holy Spirit will shut it down, as he has always done when erroneous proposals threaten Church doctrine and unity.

Livro: História dos Cristãos Árabes pós Maomé.

Dos Doutores da Igreja, muitos são do Oriente Médio ou de regiões que hoje são muçulmanas. Santo Agostinho nasceu na hoje muçulmana Argélia. Santo Atanásio nasceu no hoje muçulmano Egito.  São Cirilo também é do Egito. São João Crisóstomo nasceu na hoje muçulmana Turquia. São Basílio também é da Turquia. São Efraim era da Síria.

O Cristianismo nasceu, aliás, no hoje mundo de maioria muçulmana. O Oriente Médio é o berço do cristianismo.

A história dos cristãos no mundo antes e após Maomé é de muito sofrimento e luta. E continua sendo.

E agora foi lançado o livro acima, que conta a história dos cristãos ortodoxos (em comunhão com a Igreja Católica - cristãos melquitas) pós Maomé. Parece sensacional.

Em um mundo de matança dos últimos cristãos no mundo árabe, o livro se torna obrigatório.

Dr. David Bertaina, vez uma análise do livro. Leiam abaixo parte da análise dele.

BOOK REVIEW:

The Orthodox Church in the Arab World, 700-1700

By David Bertaina, PhD

The Orthodox Church in the Arab World, 700-1700: An Anthology of Sources. Edited by Samuel Noble and Alexander Treiger. Northern Illinois University Press, 2014. 375 Pages. $35.

The fourth century was an age of conflict between the Nicene faith (which we profess each Sunday at liturgy) and the heresy of Arianism (the belief that Jesus was a lesser deity separate from God). At one point, the Roman Emperor Valens even tried to force his citizens to follow him into Arianism. In response to his coercion, the Roman ally and Arab queen Mavia rebelled against his policies, successfully receiving an orthodox Arab monk named Moses as bishop of her people. Christian Arabic poetry even commemorated this triumph, according the fifth-century Church historian Sozomen. 

Stories such as this one remind us that Arab Christianity is an ancient faith, stretching back millennia into Roman times. With this in mind,The Orthodox Church in the Arab World should be recognized as one of the most important resources published for English-speaking Melkites in recent years. The book reminds its readers that Arab Christians have remained standard bearers for Christianity and contributed to the cultural vibrancy of the Middle East in the midst of Islam. Indeed, the book reminds Melkites about the historical origins and development of their identity.

The Orthodox Church in the Arab World is aimed at non-specialists, including those interested in the history of Christianity and those seeking to increase their faith. It introduces non-Arabic speakers to the biblical studies, theology, lives of the saints, historical writings, poetry, and inter-religious writings of Arab Christians from 700-1700. In other words, it covers Arabic-speaking Christians in the Levant from the rise of Islam until the split of the Church into the Antiochian Orthodox and Melkite Greek Catholic Churches.

The introduction to the book, a real gem thanks to the editors, Samuel Noble and Alexander Treiger, provides a concise historical survey of Arab Christianity from its origins to the eighteenth century. They address its origins before the rise of Islam, its significance related to Muhammad, Christian responses to the Muslim conquest, life under the Umayyads in Damascus (661-750), the height of Christian Arabic literature under the Abbasids (750-1258), Arab Christians during the Byzantine reconquest of Antioch, relations with Crusaders, Mongols, and Mamluks, and finally the situation in relation to the Ottomans.

[…]

History is one of the most profitable ways of understanding Melkite identity. It enables us to imagine a world greater than the one we presently experience and to empathize with the peoples who have walked the same earth and contributed to its present state. The introductions to each chapter and the quality translations in this book provide moments of entertainment, suspense, historical insight, and a reason to believe in the faith that has been preserved and shared by Arab Christians.

I strongly recommend The Orthodox Church in the Arab World as a way to learn more the Melkite Church, its history, its identity, and what that means for us today. The Orthodox Church in the Arab World is a treasure to be read and shared widely.

(Agradeço indicação do livro ao site Big Pulpit)

Por que as Mulheres querem se tornar Homens Imaturos?

Uma colega de trabalho me falou hoje que participou de uma reunião de feministas com a presença da própria ministra para mulheres, Eleonora Menicucci. A minha colega me disse que a fala da ministra foi péssima, parecia alguém preso na década de 60, mas esta minha colega também tinha um discurso preso na década de 60: "as mulheres não estão no posto-chaves" ou "as mulheres não são "programadas" para assumir riscos, como os homens são".

Hoje, parece-me que algo me implorou para que o tema do blog fosse as mulheres. Liguei o computador e recebi um texto sobre mulheres católicas que trabalham, esta minha colega me falou aquilo e fui acessar o site Pewsitter e a primeira reportagem era sobre mulheres sem filho.

O texto fala do lançamento de um blog para mulheres católicas que trabalham.  E a reportagem diz que "as mulheres sem filhos" estão aumentando nos Estados Unidos. 15,3% das mulheres americanas entre 40 e 44 anos não têm filho, em 2014, eram 9,2% em 2008.

Bom, para começar, eu não considero ninguém que tenha abortado como "sem filho", mas deixemos este aspecto (relevante) de lado.

Será que é isto que a mulher quer, não ter filhos nenhum? Será que ela deseja apenas se dedicar a carreira? Ganhos materiais são tão importantes e compensadores assim?

Não sei dizer com certeza, mas eu diria que não, pois conheço muito bem este tipo de mulher, muito de perto. E posso garantir a tristeza das que conheço, depois de anos "batendo com a cabeça na parede" para "ter  próprio dinheiro, para comprar suas coisas (inúmeras coisas)".

Mas, como homem,  de uma coisa eu tenho certeza.

Eu não quero esta mulher que não ver nada de importante em ter filhos!!!! E eu não conheço nenhum homem que queira.

No máximo, eu converso sobre amenidades com ela, nada de muito significante.Mas eu conheço homens que podem querer algo mais, como uma noite de sexo.

Se a mulher acha que ganhos materiais e uma noite de sexo aqui e acolá é o suficiente para ser feliz, ela se tornou um homem, virou "machista". Pois os homens também ainda com mais frequência costumar achar isso, mas eles sempre souberam que isto não é suficiente, por isso se casam.

É por isso que perguntei à minha colega por que as mulheres queriam se tornar homens imaturos.

Ela não soube responder.

O Conselho de Segurança da ONU discutiu a Perseguição a Cristãos.

A pedido da França, o Conselho de Segurança da ONU, se reuniu para discurtir a perseguição a cristãos no Oriente Médio. Não posso deixar de lembrar que os muçulmanos chamavam os Cruzados de "Francos", porque a França tomou a frente das Cruzadas.

Participaram da reunião embaixadores da ONU e ministro das relações exteriores (representantes de "altas patentes") de diversos países. Houve discursos de vários países, incluindo o Brasil, e também da Santa Sé. Países islâmicos também participaram. Até a Organização de Cooperação Islâmica (OIC).

A Santa Sé mencionou o Papa Bento XVI e também o Papa Francisco. Dizendo Bento XVI defendia a abordagem de que a ONU tem a "Responsabilidade de Proteger" e o Papa Francisco disse que o mundo deve procurar "parar" (stop) com as atrocidades contra os cristãos.

Eu lembro que nesta fala do Papa Francisco, ele mencionou que ele não se referia a "fazer guerra" ou "bombardear". Mas parece-me que a Santa Sé e possivelmente até o Papa, estão esquecendo esta advertência pois pedem "ação imediata". Mas até agora as palavras sobre o dever de realizar um "guerra justa" na defesa dos cristãos ainda não vieram.

O Brasil pareceu dizer que as causas do terrorismo islâmico é a pobreza, a falta de perspectiva. A OIC foi bem mais enfática no problema religioso contra os cristãos que o Brasil.

 A ausência mais sentida foi a dos Estados Unidos, que não enviou nem sua embaixadora da ONU, nem seu Secretário de Estado (correspondente a ministro de relações exteriores),mas apenas uma representante de menor patente (embaixadora do Sri Lanka).

O encontro ocorreu no dia 27 de março, durante a 7.419 reunião do Conselho.

Não vi repercussão desta notícia no Brasil e pouca coisa relatada na imprensa internacional.

Aqui vão as falas da França, da Jordânia, da OIC, do Brasil, de Israel, do Irã,  da Arábia Saudita, do Patriarca Caldeu Católico (Louis Raphel Sako) e da Santa Sé:

LAURENT FABIUS, Minister for Foreign Affairs of France, which holds the March Council presidency, spoke in his national capacity, saying that today’s debate must go beyond an “alarm bell”.  Da’esh had unleashed terror, targeted attacks and mass beheadings, including against Christians and Yezidis.  Facing the total disappearance of minority groups, the international community must act.  “Minorities were not asking for favours,” he said.  “They were simply demanding their rights.”  The United Nations agencies played a major role and Member States must reinforce their financial support, he said, proposing a special fund for the return of displaced populations.  Military action must keep that in mind so that when Da’esh forces were pushed back, minority communities could return to their homes.  The international community should, among other things, support the coexistence of all communities.  Fighting impunity was also important, he said, proposing that the Secretary-General present the Council with a plan of action to address the situation of minorities in the Middle East.

DINA KAWAR (Jordan), citing killings, rape, forced displacement and persecution of minorities, including Christians, Turkmens, Assyrians, said they were being deliberately attacked by ISIS, which aimed to annihilate them in the region.  Girls had been enslaved, forced to work as suicide bombers, executioners and sex workers.  Such violence was new to the Middle East, which historically had been known for pluralism and coexistence among its many faiths.  Today’s challenge was to hold to account, deter and prevent impunity.  Violations against ethnic or religious minorities by extremist armed groups must be monitored and documented, and she proposed the creation of a mechanism to monitor the assets seized from minorities.  The Israeli-Palestinian conflict and the Syrian crisis must be urgently addressed.  Jordan, a custodian of Islamic sites, was making every effort to protect religious minorities, notably through its policy of tolerance and respect for religion, and it was hosting 2,000 Christians who had fled ISIS-related violence in Iraq.

UFUK GOKCEN, Permanent Observer for the Organization of Islamic Cooperation, said that “the alarming developments in Syria and Iraq should not be seen as civilizational or religious confrontation”.  The start of the terror campaign of Da’esh particularly targeting Christian and Yezidi Iraqi citizens and forced deportations under the threat of execution was a serious threat aimed at tearing apart the social fabric of the Iraqi people.  The Secretary General of the Organization of Islamic Cooperation had publicly condemned the inhuman acts of Da’esh, and underlined that such atrocities contradicted the organization’s principles.  Its Secretary General had also condemned attacks against Christians in Syria and Iraq and warned against a “slide towards a sectarian dimension” in the Syrian crisis.  It remained concerned about attacks and vandalism targeting Islamic and Christian holy sites in the occupied East Jerusalem.  “It is vital that religious leaders, as moral leaders of their communities, play a responsible role to ensure communal peace and harmony,” he said, describing a number of initiatives in that respect.

MOHAMED ALI ALHAKIM (Iraq) said that his country took pride in thousands of years of cultural diversity.  Under its new Constitution, all Iraqis were equal before the law.  Recent events had caused “double danger” to all Iraqis and to minorities in particular.  Iraqi groups such as Christians, Yezidis and others contributed to the inclusive elected Government, which fostered national unity and provided a decent and dignified life to Iraq’s citizens.  Today, however, there was significant danger, as ISIS had imposed itself by armed force and had managed to extend its might over large areas of Iraq and Syria.  The Da’esh group targeted minorities, but its actions had engulfed all Iraqis without exception.  The group undertook systemic aggression against private and religious places, raped women and abducted children.  Thousands of Christian and Yezidi girls had been captured and sold.  Such violence and persecution threatened the Iraqi social fabric.  Calling the actions of Da’esh “war crimes, crimes against humanity and even genocide”, he went on to say that hundreds of thousands of people had been displaced as a result of the violence.  The solution did not lay with the relocation of minority groups.  Instead, the very existence of Da’esh must be eradicated, he said.

GUILHERME DE AGUAIR PATRIOTA (Brazil) described the widespread and systematic persecution of individuals on ethnic and religious grounds as one of the ugliest aspects of the recent surge of violent extremism in the Middle East and elsewhere.  The international community could not remain indifferent in the face of such savagery.  Brazil, as a pluricultural, multi-ethnic nation, assumed diversity as a defining trait of its identity.  It thus strongly condemned the persecution of individuals on the basis of their ethnicity or belief and rejected any act of intolerance or incitement to religious or ethnic hatred.  Violent extremism was a multidimensional threat and would only be efficiently countered by considering its underlying causes such as political instability, poverty and exclusion.  The Middle East and the world could no longer bear the burden of unresolved conflicts such as one between Israel and Palestine, he said, and called for a political solution in Syria, Libya and Yemen.  Initiatives such as the Alliance of Civilizations would contribute to dispel stereotypes that associated terrorism with specific cultures, religions or ethnic groups.

RON PROSOR (Israel) described persecution against Jews in Arab lands, where 1 million of them had lived for 2,500 years, following the United Nations vote to establish a Jewish State.  Thousands had been murdered in riots and hundreds of thousands more had been forced to flee.  Having succeeded in ridding their lands of Jews, extremists were now turning to Christians and other minorities, he stated, describing recent atrocities by ISIL and others.  Calling the Kurds the “leading force” against ISIL, he urged support for their political independence.  Citing persecution of minorities in what he called “tyrannical regimes” in the Middle East, he said that there was only one place in the region where minorities had the freedom to practise their faith, change faith or practise no faith at all, and that was Israel.  Christians in areas under Palestinian leadership were under threat.  It was time for the Security Council to break its silence on such persecution and give the world’s people a reason to believe in it.

GHOLAMALI KHOSHROO (Iran) strongly condemning the widespread targeting and killing of ethnic monitories by Da’esh terrorists and other extremists, and said that “violent extremism has emerged as an unprecedented composition of narcissistic, dogmatic and violent entities with a global agenda”.  That new force was a unique global terror network, active in recruiting as many as 90 countries, sharing terror tactics and romanticizing violence and bloodshed.  They continued to use social media to reach out to young people.  The terror network was “unparalleled in its brutality”, and its members falsely called themselves Muslims.  The international community’s inconsistent, incoherent policy and strategy in combating extremist groups fundamentally undermined efforts to confront them and even served to embolden them.  Indeed, a comprehensive strategy against Da’esh must address ideological, social, political and economic dimensions of violent extremism.  “If there is a genuine resolve to combat extremism, it must be translated into specific and effective actions,” he said, calling for a “united front” with a clear message and a coordinated strategy including the disruption of financial and logistical support and the sharing of relevant information.

ABDALLAH Y. AL-MOUALLIMI (Saudi Arabia) said Islam faced a dual attack.  From within, extremists falsely cloaked in religious garb, were carrying out killings and persecution, largely against Muslims.  From without, an inflammatory media campaign was being waged which included violence against Muslims in Europe, Myanmar and elsewhere.  He wished today’s meeting had not limited itself to attacks against minorities in the Middle East.  Islam did not discriminate among religions.  The persecution of religious minorities violated the laws of Islam.  That was used often to justify the oppression and marginalization of Muslims, whether at the hands of unjust regimes, such as in Syria, or Israel, which persecuted Palestinians.  He urged action based on two pillars:  combatting all forms of terrorism and isolating its supporters, and implementing international justice and rule of law — between and within States.  He pressed the Council to devise a “profound” remedy to the region’s problems, notably by acknowledging Palestinians’ right to self-determination and reaching a political solution to the situation in Syria.  Hizbullah and Houthis must be prevented from imposing their will through armed force.  Saudi Arabia continued to combat those who persecuted minorities.

BERNARDITO CLEOPAS AUZA, Permanent Observer of the Holy See, said that the fate of those for whom this debate had come too late should motivate action to prevent further abuses.  Christians and other religious minorities of the Middle East sought to be heard in the Council in a manner that was truly conscious of their suffering and their fear for survival in the region and beyond.  Noting the atrocities and flight suffered by Christians there, he expressed gratitude to the leaders who openly defended them as an integral part of the cultural fabric for the past 2,000 years.  He conveyed Pope Benedict XVI’s support for the concept of “responsibility to protect” as well as Pope Francis’ call for the international community to “do all that it can to stop and to prevent further systematic violence against ethnic and religious minorities”.  Delay in action, he stressed, would only mean more people would die.

Indeed, the situation in Iraq was reminiscent of massacres of Christians a century ago, said Louis Raphael Sako, patriarch of the Chaldean Catholic Church of Babylon.  “We are living the same catastrophic situation.  The so-called Arab Spring impacted negatively on us,” he said.  Positive coexistence should remain a priority for the Council.  He urged support for the central Government and regional government of Kurdistan towards liberating all Iraqi cities, as well as protection for Christians, Yezidis and Shabaks.

Os Estágios do Domínio do Mal.

O filósofo Edward Feser tem um texto muito elucidativo sobre como o mal avança entre aqueles que defendem o mal (em geral, esquerdistas), e também entre aqueles que são (inicialmente) contra (conservadores).

É um texto para ser lido na sua totalidade, aqui vão apenas os estágios do avanço do mal entre esquerdistas e conservadores.

Os esquerdistas vão de "é apenas uma pequena mudança, não sejam paranóicos, não queremos  nada disso (aborto, eutanásia, casamento gay)" para "qualquer um que rejeite isso, deverá ser silenciado".

Os conservadores vão de "nós devemos nos opor a todo custo" ´para "Eu sempre fui a favor disso (aborto, eutanásia, casamento gay)".

Acho que estamos no estágio 5 (último) para esquerdistas e 4 para conservadores e até dentro da própria Igreja Católica. Feser considera que estão no estágio 4 para ambos.

Vejamos cada estágio descrito por Feser:

To the charge that liberals are (or, given their principles, should be) in favor of X [where X = legalizing abortion, liberalizing obscenity laws, banning smoking on private property, legalizing “same-sex marriage,” outlawing the public advocacy of traditional sexual morality, etc. etc.], the standard liberal response goes through about five stages (with, it seems, roughly 5-10 years passing between each stage, though sometimes the transition is much quicker than that).  Here they are:

Stage 1: “Oh please. Only a far-right-wing nutjob would make such a paranoid and ridiculous accusation - I suppose next you’ll accuse us of wanting to poison your precious bodily fluids!”

Stage 2: “Well, I wouldn’t go as far as X. All the same, it’s good to be open-minded about these things. I mean, people used to think ending slavery was a crazy idea too…”

Stage 3: “Hey, the Europeans have had X for years and the sky hasn’t fallen. But no, I admit that this backward country probably isn’t ready for X yet.”

Stage 4: “Of course I’m in favor of X - it’s in the Constitution! Only a far-right-wing nutjob could possibly oppose it.”

Stage 5: “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can be used against you in a court of law…”

…

Fortunately, though, we can rely on conservatives to hold the line, and indeed to turn back liberal advances. Right?

Well, no, of course not. (You can stop rolling your eyes, I was being facetious.) For conservatives - or maybe I should say “conservatives” (since there’s very little that they ever actually manage to conserve, unless money is somehow involved) - seem to go through five stages of their own. Here they are:

Stage 1: “Mark my words: if the extreme left had its way, they’d foist X upon us! These nutjobs must be opposed at all costs.”

Stage 2: “Omigosh, now even thoughtful, mainstream liberals favor X! Fortunately, it’s political suicide.”

Stage 3: “X now exists in 45 out of 50 states. Fellow conservatives, we need to learn how to adjust to this grim new reality.”

Stage 4: “X isn’t so bad, really, when you think about it. And you know, sometimes change is good. Consider slavery…”

                                                

Stage 5: “Hey, I was always in favor of X! You must have me confused with a [paleocon, theocon, Bible thumper, etc.]. But everyone knows that mainstream conservatism has nothing to do with those nutjobs…”

No dia mais Triste do Ano. Olhamos o Mundo. E Ele nos Abandona.

Estamos sem Deus. É "Sábado de Aleluia", o dia mais triste para os cristãos. Nosso Deus está morto. O Papa Emérito Bento XVI comparou este dia com a época que vivemos:

"After two world wars, the concentration camps and gulags, Hiroshima and Nagasaki, our age became increasingly a Holy Saturday, teh day when Jesus's body lay lifeless in the tomb" (Papa Bento XVI)

Ontem, foi divulgado que 147 estudantes cristãos foram mortos por terroristas islâmicos. Os terroristas procuraram matar todos que eram cristãos.

O que os líderes do mundo, Obama e Papa Francisco, falaram sobre isso?

Pelo o que Obama diz, não se sabe por que os estudantes foram mortos. Talvez o problema é que os estudantes iriam ser professores, e  os terroristas seriam contra isso. Pelo o que diz Obama, os terroristas não seriam muçulmanos, nem os mortos, seriam cristãos. Os mortos foram apenas chamados de inocentes, e os terroristas, de terroristas.

Vejamos o que ele disse:

E o que disse o Papa Francisco.

Ele condenou o "silêncio cúmplice" que permite que os cristãos sejam perseguidos, decapitados e crucificados. Mas ressaltou que devemos perdoar sempre.

No entanto, mais uma vez, o Papa Francisco não se levantou para dizer ao mundo como devemos defender os cristãos. Quebraríamos o "silêncio cúmplice" apenas rezando pelos cristãos.

Bom, permitam-me lembrar uma frase de Cristo, dita na "Quinta-feira Santa", dia em que os cristãos foram mortos (João 13, 16-17)

"Em verdade, em verdade vos digo: o servo não é maior do que o seu Senhor, nem o enviado é maior do que aquele que o enviou. Se compreenderdes estas coisas, sereis felizes, sob condição de as praticardes."

Temos que praticar as palvaras de Cristo. Preciso agir de acordo. Precisamos sair do conforto das orações e agir também.

Vejamos o vídeo abaixo da Rome Reports que retrata estas palavras do Papa Francisco (após o vídeo, vai a transcrição do que é dito)

Once again, Pope Francis presided over the Stations of the Cross at the Colosseum, which is a symbol for the martyrdom of early Christians.

Thousands of pilgrims flocked to the center of Rome to commemorate the Passion of Jesus at 14 stations.

At each station, different people who symbolized pain or difficulty in the worldcarried the cross. 

In a year specially dedicated to the family, they could not fail. A large family with adopted children carried the cross at the first station.

Sick people were also present. At the fifth station, in which Simon of Cyrene helped Jesus carry the cross, this woman was in charge of holding the cross.

Representatives from countries in crisis were also present. People from Iraq, Syria, Nigeria, Egypt and China, countries where Christians are persecuted, all carried the cross. 

The meditations that accompanied the Stations were written by the Italian Bishop Renato Corti. He compared Christ's suffering with the dramas of today: the persecution of Christians, child abuse, human trafficking, and the death penalty.

At the end of the ceremony, Pope Francis offered a brief meditation. He placed a special emphasis on the plight of persecuted Christians.

POPE FRANCIS

"In You, Divine Love, we still see our persecuted brothers, beheaded and crucified because of their faith while we watch or while we remain silent accomplices.”

Pope Francis also invited Christians to learn from Jesus Christ, who he said never tires of forgiving. He asked them to never get tired of apologizing to God and believing in His limitless mercy.

---

O Quiz da Morte contra Cristãos Voltou ao Quênia.

Que quinta-feira santa terrível para os cristãos do Quênia!

Eu já falei aqui no blog duas ocasiões em que terroristas islâmicos pergutavam a quenianos se eles eram cristãos ou muçulmanos, caso fossem cristãos, eles eram mortos. A primeira foi em um shopping em 2013, e a segunda foi no ano passado na cidade de Mpeketoni. Hoje, o quiz da morte dos cristãos voltou ao Quênia, dessa vez na cidade de Garissa, em uma universidade. Estudantes eram perguntados quando dormiam se eram cristãos. São três vezes, mas houve muito mais ataques,

Vejamos parte da descrição do ataque terrorista de hoje feita pelo jornal Daily Mail.

Al-Shabaab terrorists interrogated students whether they were Christian or Muslim as they went door-to-door during this morning's early morning massacre at a Kenyan university, killing at least 15 people. 

The group raided the Garissa University campus shortly after 5am local time, overwhelming guards and killing anyone the suspected of being a Christian. 

Kenyan Interior Minister Joseph Nkaissery said that only 280 of the 815 students in the college have so far been accounted for.

Kenyan security officials said one of the terrorists has been arrested after he tried to escape the compound. 

Eye-witness Collins Wetangula, the vice chairman of the student union, said he was preparing to take a shower when he heard gunshots coming from Tana dorm, which hosts both men and women, 150 meters (yards) away. 

The campus has six dormitories and at least 887 students, he said.

The remaining terrorists have been cornered in one of the four remaining dormitories according to Kenyan security officials.  

He said that when he heard the gunshots he locked himself and three roommates in their room. 'All I could hear were footsteps and gunshots nobody was screaming because they thought this would lead the gunmen to know where they are.

'The gunmen were saying sisi ni al-Shabaab (Swaihi for we are al-Shabaab).' 

Mr Wetangula said he could hear the gunmen interrogating fellow students hiding inside their rooms about their religion.

He said: 'If you were a Christian you were shot on the spot. With each blast of the gun I thought I was going to die.'

The gunmen started to shoot rapidly and it was as if there was an exchange of fire, he said.

'The next thing, we saw people in military uniform through the window of the back of our rooms who identified themselves as the Kenyan military.'

The soldiers took him and approximately 20 others to safety.

As they were running, al-Shabaab snipers on top of a three-storey building attempted to gun them down. 

He added: 'We started running and bullets were whizzing past our heads and the soldiers told us to dive.' 

Fellow student, Augustine Alanga, 21, described a panicked scene as gunshots rang out outside their dormitory.

He said he saw at least five heavily-armed terrorists wearing masks. 

He said: 'I am just now recovering from the pain as I injured myself while trying to escape. I was running barefoot.'

He told journalists he crossed barbed-wire fencing to escape the massacre.

Mr Alanga said any students attending morning prayers at the university's mosque at 5.30am were not attacked.

Al-Shabab militants have previously vowed retribution against Kenya for sending troops to Somalia.

The Somalia-based group has carried out several attacks in Garissa and across Kenya, including the 2013 attack on an upscale shopping mall in the capital Nairobi. 

Kenya sent its troops into Somalia in 2011 to fight al-Shabaab militants following cross-border attacks.  

Last month, al-Shabaab claimed responsibility for attacks in the county of Mandera on the Somali border in which twelve people died. 

Four of them died in an attack on the convoy of Mandera County Governor Ali Roba.

Police statistics show that 312 people have been killed in al-Shabaab attacks in Kenya from 2012 to 2014. Thirty-eight people were killed and 149 wounded in Garissa in the same period.

Filme Cinderella. As Feministas estão Odiando. Por quê?

De vez em quando passo por notícias que dão conta do novo filme da Disney, Cinderella. Muitos sites cristãos estão elogiando a nova versão do clássico da Cinderela e dizem que os grupos feministas estão odiando o filme. Hoje, leio no blog The Crescat quais são as razões para o ódio das feministas. Entre estas razões estão que o filme retrata mais a personalidade do príncipe (formado por valores paternos), que a Cinderella exibe sua feminilidade em vestidos femininos, e também mostra a fonte da maldade da madrasta (a dependência do marido). Elas queriam uma Cinderella vestida com roupas de homem, que amasse uma mulher, talvez.

O filme da Cinderella se insere na guerra cultural que vivemos, em que um lado procura destruir tudo que representa a natureza da família, do homem e da mulher.  Como disse certa vez o escritor Andrew Klavan, os conservadores devem entrar na guerra que se trava no mundo das artes, cinema, televisão, teatro, livros, cartoons, etc.

Assim, o filme é relevante.

A Katrina Fernandez, do site The Crescat, recomenda que todos assistam. Bom, como eu gosto muito do blog dela, eu confio na recomendação.

Aqui vai o trailer do filme: