Lula and the Catholics

An essential item to neo-leftism is the will to be morally superior to Christians. And how do they prove it? Adopting a materialist and proletarian morality taken from some Marxist? No, because they are the new left, and the new left does not read Marx. The way they prove it is by snipping lines about Jesus from the Bible, or by dropping sugary phrases about supposedly Christian love, so that anyone who isn’t a cuddly tree hugger is a bad Christian. You see, Christianity emerged in antiquity, reigned in the Middle Ages, so it is highly unlikely that the understanding of the Christian as a cuddly who distributes hugs has had historical validity. A martyr of antiquity, through his willingness to die for Christianity, would certainly pass for an extremist and a radical theocrat. A medieval crusader, for his belligerence, would soon be framed as a fascist. This conception of Christianity as cute and corny must come from some Protestant sect in the US that has never faced religious war. Hillary Clinton was an ardent devotee of the United Methodist Church and, if Jonah Goldberg is to be believed, her corny communitarianism is a secular version of the religion she professed. As everything is copied in the tropics, the new left, and even the Catholic left, decided that to be a Christian is to be a bleeding-heart liberal – something like a “bleeding-heart progressive”, which that’s what Americans call their mushy left. Argumentative tactics are barely discernible from emotional blackmail. Are you against the distribution of free fashions? So poor girls will not have the dignity (sic) to menstruate. They will have to use bread crumbs (sic!). They will stop going to school. Are you against racial quotas? One billion black people die every minute in Brazil because of structural racism. Your hands are stained with blood! Are you against safe and legal abortion? Abortion is a public health issue! Trillions of women die every second in Brazil stuffing bread crumbs, in fact, coat hangers and even stove soot, as I heard in Jaguaquara in Bahia. The rich have abortions and become CEOs. The poor die. Assassin! It’s no use trying to use reason. If you do, it’s cold and unfeeling. The only acceptable reaction is to cry and regret the previous opinion, immediately accepting all the laws that one wants to pass.

The Catholic Church of not so long ago

The Catholic Church has always been perceived by the Protestant and wealthy world as backward, obscurantist, rudimentary – more or less how the progressive university sees the religious as a whole today, no matter how much studied. Part of this backwardness, obscurantism and rudeness consisted, during the century. XX, in the refusal of progressive agendas, such as: contraception, abortion, euthanasia, compulsory and eugenic sterilization, the eugenic prohibition of interracial marriages, scientific racism. I use the expression “progressive” for mere historical accuracy, as the era presided over by this elite movement was called the Progressive Era, in the USA, a country with a Protestant background, in which Catholicism was the thing of the Irish and Italian poor. The same ideology reappeared at the end of the 20th century, renaming itself “liberalism”, but the very name “progressismo” was never abandoned.

The very opposition between being an adept of Science and of Religion is a result of a particularism in the USA, where biblical literalism forces creationism, for example. The Church since the Middle Ages adhered to “science”, which was Aristotelianism. The problem with geocentrism did not stem from biblical literalism, but from the fact that the Church adopted the pagan Aristotle as the ultimate authority on philosophical matters. The university itself is a Catholic and medieval creation.

Another difference worth noting between Catholicism and Protestantism is that the latter, once split into a myriad of sects, has no a uniform opinion. Is Protestantism “homophobic”? The university student swears that he does, but the Protestant Anglican Church in the USA has already become a drag on the LGBTQ movement. Silas Malafaia is Protestant, the Anglican Church is Protestant, Bola de Neve Church is Protestant. In the US, the fight against abortion counts with great mobilization of evangelical Protestants – but there are also favorable Protestants. The Roman Catholic Apostolic Church does not. In it, the authority of biblical passages quoted in isolation is not valid; the authority of the Pope, who, in his turn, is seated on an orthodoxy built up over several centuries is valid. It is important to note that the Pope is not considered infallible 24 h per day, but only when he is spoken ex cathedra . And as much as Bergoglio is prone to progressive affectations, the fact is that the Pope never allowed abortion.

Do progressive Catholics deceive the electorate?


Recently, the conflict between the top and the base of the Catholic Church in Brazil broke out. As this column showed, the lay people of Centro Dom Bosco, enthusiastic supporters of the Catholic Bolsonaro, were already bringing the bishop of Kazakhstan to Rio de Janeiro because they did not feel represented by the bishops of the CNBB. The organization is against abortion, against the legalization of drugs and against communism – it believes in the Prophecy of Cimbres, a kind of Brazilian version of the Miracle of Fatima that took place in the Pernambuco hinterland in 1936 . According to her, Brazil has to pray and do penance so communism doesn’t bathe our country in blood.

The members of the Dom Bosco Center went to Aparecida to pray the Rosary with Bolsonaro. According to reports, the rectory of Aparecida did their best to disrupt the event, Bolsonaro ended up not going to prayer, and they (this is documented in the video) were disturbed by the bells while praying. The bells rang nonstop, competing with the organizer’s microphone.

The bishop’s sealing during the celebration has already been pointed out by more attentive observers than myself. I just want to point out that, in an electoral context, the bishop adheres to the disarmament agenda of progressive NGOs (“beloved homeland will not be armed”), but does not give a peep about abortion. We know that Bolsonaro is against disarmament and abortion, and that Lula believes that abortion “should be turned into a public health issue, and everyone should have the right and not be ashamed”, as he said in April of this year at the Perseu Abramo Foundation. . In other words, Lula adheres to the agenda of progressive NGOs not only on the issue of disarmament, but also in defense of abortion being considered a human right.

But calm down, it gets worse. Marcia Tiburi, a walking stereotype who enjoys a corner specializing in Phrases of the Week, has been using Twitter to compare Bolsonaro’s rise to Hitler’s. Cardinal and Archbishop D. Odilo Scherer, after a series of defensive tweets assuring that he has written a lot against abortion, tweeted: “To be clear: I seem to be reliving the times of fascism’s rise to power. And we know the consequences…”. It is the cultural tiburism taking over the Brazilian Catholic leadership.

The episode of the Dom Bosco Center, combined with the appearance of Fr. Kelmon (who is from an obscure church), was often used to say that bolsonaristas hate priests and are false Catholics. The theologian from Rome and professor of communication at UFBA Wilson Gomes tweeted like this: “Send more videos of Bolsonaristas cursing priests. This is causing havoc with voting intentions for Bolsonaro in my village that I don’t even tell them about.” His “village” must be his homeland, a small town in southern Bahia that should be proud of how far Wilson Gomes has come. And the Northeast is the most Catholic region in Brazil.

So you can imagine the size of the deception that is imposed on this population: Catholics who follow the Vatican are fake and fascist; Lula, who defends the right to abortion, is a good Catholic. Wilson Gomes can send videos about how bad Bolsonar Catholics are; Bolsonaristas cannot send the video in which Lula says that no one should be ashamed of having an abortion, because the TSE does not allow it.

“Nobody is in favor of abortion ”

Justice be done, the CNBB, through the person of D. Odilo, in fact took a stand against the right to abortion. But, however, however, however, when it comes to influencing the elections, the bishops do not move a straw to prevent the right to abortion – on the contrary, since they attack Bolsonaro.

The justification on the tip of the tongue of the wilsons gomes of life is imported from the USA. “No one is in favor of abortion”, they say, before the litany of the zillions of women who die in clandestine abortions because they were going to do it anyway. Since women abort anyway, the bleeding-heart liberal wants there to be free, public, quality abortion for women. As “no one is in favor of abortion”, we will be sure that brainless teenagers (pleonasm), drugged or irresponsible women in general would never use and abuse something public, free, quality, totally safe (according to the advertisement).

If common sense were not enough, the macabre repercussion of the reversal of Roe v. Wade in the feminist and business circles would not let us believe that. We saw that abortion is in fact treated as a means of contraception, with companies pretending to be philanthropists because they pay for their employees’ abortion trips – to support motherhood, which is good, nothing. Would they let a pregnant woman who did not want to have an abortion pocket the expenses of the abortion?

Turn in the culture

During the elections de 2010, Serra, former president of the UNE, passed as a rightist for adopting the anti-abortion agenda. Perhaps it was at this time that the “nobody is in favor of abortion” emerged, with Dilma saying: “I don’t think any woman is in favor of abortion. As President of the Republic, I have to face the fact that there are thousands of young people, teenagers, who, in the face of abortion, unprotected, do and adopt practices, because they are abandoned.” That’s where the public health issue comes in, which is to open the doors (and the safes) for Planned Parenthood.

Anyway, now, in 2022, Lula is running after all possible means to present himself to the electorate as opposed to abortion and even the possibility of changing sex. That’s what he did in Flow a little while ago, with the right to the friendly press declaring to the four winds that Lula is “against abortion”.

But he is against abortion “personally”, and , as he claims, who has to say whether or not you can abort is the law. Given the prevailing legal anomie, this is not a very encouraging position.

In its statement against abortion, the CNBB said that “no one will be able, in the future, to accuse the same Church of not having spoken clearly and defended the first right of the unborn: respect for their life.” If we accept the premise that the CNBB has some relevance in STF hearings, it is true. But I can’t imagine Barroso or Fachin letting trillions of women die because representatives of the capitalist heteropatriarchy want to control women’s bodies.

If there was ever a time for the CNBB to take any effective action, it was in the elections. Thus, your letter serves to wash your hands.

Back to top button