Who says the U.N. isn’t effective?
January 9, 2012, 9:44 am
Posted by David Gibson
Quote of the Day:
“The Minister for Family of the Papal Government, Cardinal Antonelli, told me a few days ago in Zaragoza that UNESCO has a program for the next 20 years to make half the world population homosexual. To do this they have distinct programs, and will continue to implant the ideology that is already present in our schools.”
– The Bishop of Córdoba, Demetrio Fernández, from his Boxing Day homily, as quoted in El Pais.
I think UNESCO has a lot of work ahead of it. Maybe the KKK can help.
Isn’t that why they put fluoride in the water?
Assuming he understood correctly, I wonder what the logic is.
Talk about your population control strategy!
Another hierarchical ugly statement?
but, a serious question: wasn’t the Vatican supposed to send a long overdue statemnt to the UN on children by the end of last year?
Dear Bishop Fernández:
The Spanish Inquisition disbanded in 1834.
Peace,
Helen
Speaking of Frauds in the Church!
Has yet another Fatima letter been unearthed and His Gracelessness has been made privy to it prior to the SSPX?
In the super-duper secret Vatican archives: proof that homosexuals are making landing strips for gay martians.
Hello All,
I actually think that perhaps I should go to confession soon because I don’t simply believe this story is false. Is there any follow up that could clarify the situation? Might it be the case that Cardinal Antonelli actually said something rather different, or that Bishop Fernandez was seriously misquoted? Isn’t there already some follow-up from the Vatican?
I have considerable respect for David G.’s reporting, but lately I wonder if I am being inconsistent. I believe the factual claims I have read in David’s reports, but I don’t believe anything reported by people like Michael Rose or Raymond Arroyo report (and for some time I have tried to avoid reading or listening to people like this.) But (my advance apologies David) this story is so bizarre I just don’t know what to believe.
Sigh, at moments like this I find it SO hard to be Roman Catholic. And admitting it in public probably makes me a that much worse a witness to our faith. But I’m frustrated! I could use a prayer or two from others here. I’ll do the same for those who are also offended by this story.
If you google either one of the following phrases:
Demetrio Fernández UNESCO
Cardinal Antonelli UNESCO
you will find multiple reports in multiple languages of the same story. Time to reread Fr. Joe’s post about frauds in the Church …
Peter V., you are right to be skeptical of some of these things, because they can be misquoted or taken out of context, though it does seem that the bishop said this:
http://www.elpais.com/articulo/sociedad/obispo/Cordoba/Unesco/quiere/hacer/mitad/poblacion/sea/homosexual/elpepusoc/20110102elpepusoc_5/Tes
This is also an OTOH/BOTOH sort of story:
On The One Hand, this is one bishop of a single Spanish diocese, and he may have misheard something Cardinal Antonelli said, and perhaps His Eminence was rolling his eyes when he said it and Bp Fernandez didn’t quite get it.
On The Other Hand, Bp Fernandez seems to have taken it as Gospel truth, and repeated it to folks who will also take it as the truth, and we’ve seen where that can go. (viz., 911 Truthers and such). It really illustrates, I think, the mindset of many in the world and certainly in the Catholic Church (esp the hierarchy) that the “dictatorship of relativism” is really out to get us, and that we are being “persecuted” and enemies are all around.
I think Christians in other countries have better reason for such fears. I do think Cdl George in his admirable apology explained how he tripped himself up with the Gays as KKK analogy because he was using a religious freedom template that his foremost in his mind. But not everything fits, and by crying wolf at everything — and doing the Chicken Little thing on homosexuals, who seem to be the main bogey man — these bishops distract from other threats and issues.
But that’s just my take. I do think it’s problematic when you have so many leaders with such a mindset, even if only a few go off the rails.
Thank you for the response David. Obviously I was pretty hot under the collar when I was writing before – I did not even get my own grammar right!
I guess at least for me Fr. K’s recent posting of the sermon from Augustine is quite timely. All too often I am feeling self righteous and sorry for myself – mostly because I think so many of the Catholics I complain about (and now I may add Cardinal Antonelli to my own “bad” list) are so self righteous and so sorry for themselves. I said a prayer for Cardinal Antonelli in addition to the promised prayers in my earlier post.
Say a prayer for us all! Again, it doesn’t necessarily sound like Cdl Antonelli and may be more about Bp Fernandez.
Whatever happened in this game of telephone, it is fair to say that UNESCO is not likely to get its headshot on the church’s Organization of the Month wall. Google “UNESCO abortion” or “UNESCO sex education” for illustrations. Or just go to lifesitenews.com and search for “UNESCO”.
It best to calm down. It is no secret that the UN – backed by monied special interests in Europe and the USA – has long busied itself with programs trying to bring less developed, what some think of as backward, patriarchal societies more in line with our so-called modern ways. Artificial birth control, women’s rights, gay rights, LBGT rights, you name it.
UN Man – Would you like money to build hospitals in your country?
Traditional Third World Man – Yes please
UN Man – First you must hand out free birth control pills and legalize abortion.
Traditional Third World Man – Hmm
UN Man – No birth control, no money; take it or leave it.
Hence (for example) traditional Muslim parents (both moms and dad’s) bristle when people from the UN poke around telling their daughters they need not heed the father’s wishes; that they should do what ‘they’ want. Traditional folks from Africa (Uganda) often have similar reactions to “modern” social mores put forth by the UN, paid for by European and US interests. Latininos marvel at the Anglo arrogance when North Americans go south, lecturing Brazilians or Argentines on the environment.
In short, no matter what UN and their “Progressive” backers claim, Catholics in Ireland, and Muslims in Tehran do not want abortion legal, and Ugandans do not want a gay rights parade.
Modern folks of course, like the enlightened ones posting here, sometimes fail to see why these more “simple” people should like to be left alone to run and organize their own societies.
— Catholics in Ireland – do not want abortion legal –
Q#1: are there any left in Ireland?
Q#2: how many Irish lassies do you think take the boat to England each year to take care of that “bun in the oven?”
“Ugandans do not want a gay rights parade.”
Yep, all they want to do is incarcerate LGBT folks (on a good day) or kill them (on a regular day.)
Muslims in Tehran? Now that’s a good group to use to make your point! Yes, indeedy!
You know what, Ken? I like you. You’re not like the other people here in the trailer park.
Oh it is easy to get all wound up and huff around about what a Spanish bishop says. However one must take into context what he was talking about and to whom he was speaking.
Spaniards and most folks who use the Spanish language are known for being more direct and frank that those of us who use English. Part of that is the Latin temperament, and part of the construct of the language. Now add to this the real trouble that Europe in general and Spain in particular are in morally, culturally and demographically.
And yes, maybe this man is a hot head. He would not be the first short-tempered or dramatic Latino I have come across. Bearing all this in mind, it is easier to see where the bishop is probably coming from and what he is trying to point out.
Mostly likely he is a good and learned man who means well, but is frustrated and perhaps spoke a bit too brashly for Anglo sensibilities. I would bet that most Spaniards, while they might be upset at the UN, are not much bothered by the bishop’s comment.
Why get so upset? This is obviously something that, if true, needs to be dismissed as unreasonable. The only impact it may have is destroy the credibility of the bishop. Why let such nonsense get to us? If he were my bishop, then, yes, I might be upset. But a random man in some foreign country sputtering a ridiculous conspiracy theory, of what concern is that to me?
“Spaniards and most folks who use the Spanish language are known for being more direct and frank that those of us who use English. Part of that is the Latin temperament, and part of the construct of the language.
Ken –
How many actual Spaniards have you ever known?
Please tell us how the construction of the language leads to Spaniards being overly frank.
Ken —
In my visits to Valencia, Madrid, Barcelona, Almeria, Cartagena, Alicante, Palma, Chile, Panama, and Mexico after beginning some familiarity with the language, I didn’t find most Spaniards I met as you stereotype them, especially in giving sermons. Perhaps you are referring specifically to Cordoba where Bp. Fernandez spoke?
Oh Jim, Jim Pauwels are you really recommending lifesitenews.com as an unbiased news source. Come on Weston and his ilk are little more than misogynous, homophobic Canadians trying to ape and one up their American pro-life cousins. They are nothing but bottom feeders spewing out hate while feeding on the gullible who live in fear of the rights of women and gays. Jim I’m shocked!
Hello Claire (and All),
I think yours is a pretty healthy perspective. I realized that I flew off the handle earlier today because rightly or wrongly I was not seeing this as an odd isolated incident, but rather as part of an escalating pattern that I simply might be all wrong about.
I left the Roman Catholic Churche about eight years ago partly because I was unhappy at what I thought was the mounting influence of the new ultramontanes (a label I used in a post on a previous thread). Not that this was necessarily a good reason for leaving, since perhaps I was just being selfish. Since I reverted four years ago I have done my best to be obedient to Church teaching, but I find it immeasurably harder when I read or hear about stuff like this.
Some of us in this thread have referred to Fr. K’s recent fine post of Augustine’s sermon. I should keep in mind that some of the ultramontanes who know me directly or indirectly find me just as hard to bear as I find some of them. (For one thing, I’m confident that one of my former professors is quite disappointed that I visit this blog and sometimes post here, when I might be contributing to New Oxford Review.)
John B, no, I’m not claiming lifesitenews.com is an unbiased news source. I do think it’s representative of a point of view that is common, and probably influential in certain quarters, even among some bishops.
The original Jan 2, 2011 report at http://www.elpais.com on the Bishop of Cordoba’s unusual statement quoted above and more is available in Spanish at
http://www.elpais.com/articulo/sociedad/obispo/Cordoba/Unesco/quiere/hacer/mitad/poblacion/sea/homosexual/elpepusoc/20110102elpepusoc_5/Tes
The reporter notes the “convoluted reasoning” of Fernandez and that his pastoral letters “often include controversial messages.” The lines following the above translate roughly as:
“The bishop of Cordoba said this gender ideology promulgates that ‘would not be born a male or female, but is chosen according to their whim, and you can change sex when they want according to their will.’ For the prelate, it is the ‘ultimate achievement of a culture that wants to break totally with God, with God the Creator who has set in our nature the distinction of male and female.’”
Abortion in Ireland, The result is more nuanced than the headline would suggest
http://www.irishexaminer.com/home/survey-60-in-favour-of-legal-abortion-110224.html
Can we dial back the name-calling please?
And Jim: Actually Lifesitenews goes after bishops too, and it has been criticized by several–including Cardinal George (if memory serves).
And Ann: Don’t you know Ken is married to a Spanish-speaking woman? Obviously that makes him an expert on the Spanish-speaking peoples of the world. Hotheads, mostly, don’t you know? Easily worked up. But very hard working.
Ken, my advice is to stop digging. You are defending statements obviously fueled by paranoid homophobia. Frankness is valuable only if one is being candid about something true.
Jeez – All I am saying is I do not understand why people on this thread would get so worked up over what one bishop says, in another language, in another land, at an event which none of those here commenting attended.
As Peter noted, people do fly off the handle sometimes; maybe the man was in a bad sort that day. I tried to note that sometimes Anglos – especially Americans – are overly sensitive and end up getting too worked up by differences in culture and manner. Obviously the bishop’s talk was over the top, but none of us know the man or was on hand to fully understand the context.
With that I will stop digging.
on flying off the handle:
I recall Carolyn on another thread saying all that matters to her is the Eucharist.
I can understand that in the widening breach Church.
Still wonderful things go on every day: Fordham magazine came yesterdy with excellent stories on how the University works with NYC government to help city schools.
God bless the SJs!
NCR came yesterday too including a piece about Catholics in Iowa.
A GOP committewoman and Santorum supporter is quoted as saying “The government should get out of the busines of helping the poor.”
We have five former US ambassadors to the Vatican endorsing Romney.What matters is family, not village.
On CNN Sunday night Don Lemon raised the questkion of race and whether the gOp was a white party. Right after, there’s a piece by Dan Rather saying the GOP candidates needed to really answer questions on race.
It strikes me that desite all our posing that that everyone is fair and well intentioned, there are deep strains of bigotries on the American right and that these have infected members of our church.
I know, you’re not supposed to say that, surface tha,t so anybody can say anything politically about those they disagree with.
Flying of the handle is just about another of the many continuing statements that are against whatever minority or I guess even now the majority ( the poor).
I just see a country and a Church coming further and further apart. But let’s all be nicey nicey about it as the beat goes on…..
I thought David Gibson was just doing his duty, broadly construed, by providing a spot of entertainment for the day. Naturally, before commenting on the Bishop and his words, one would want to read his whole homily, nearly all of which is his rigorous version of the thinking of Humanae Vitae. It is available to everybody at http://www.odisur.es/index.php?mod=articulos&secc=articulos&id=8046. If needed, Google will translate in its fashion. The bishop’s subject is “The Family, Hope of Humanity”.
Thank you Jack – I read the bishop’s sermon and basically the only part I found odd was the part about Unesco. Still, when I went through it more carefully, the way he framed it, I doubt he meant that literally, the UN plans on making half the population gay.
Rather, it is clear his is concerned – among other things he listed earrier in the homily – about the various gender identity programs Unesco plans to promulgate over the next two decades. He points out correctly of course, that people actually are born man and woman, and that gender is not something subject to a personal whim or caprice. In other words, that contraception, abortion, the gay agenda and now the blurring or bending of gender are all along the same arc; that they are not good for the family and they are not in line with the culture of life.
Again, his style is direct (frank), and while he did not clearly frame the part about Unesco, he is for the most part straightforward and on the mark, and that, more than anything, is probably what has some folks upset with him.
Others no doubt can do a better job, but here is my shot at translating his summary; it contains what I think is key to the bishop’s main point:
“The main enemy in this theme, and so many others, is not outside us. It is within us and among us, when the salt and the light of the Gospel we hide or we water down in such a manner that no one recognizes it. The main enemy of the family is to live [only] half the Gospel of the family and of life.
As we contemplate the Family of Nazareth, let us thank God for our families and we assume all the commitment to make known this good news, to evangelize our world with the gospel of the family and of life according to God’s plan. That Jesus child, adolescent and young, that Mary and Joseph bless our families. Amen”
Jean, they’re probably all the same story, a small one which quotes a few words out of context (as nearly all news stories these days do). Here’s the bit of the talk that it’s referring to, followed by a URL for the entire talk:
That’s a little more substantial, but it’s still got to be understood in context.
Cheap shots are easy – and almost always misleading.
Of course it’s the same story, on over 40 pages of Google links. The story’s gone world-wide because it’s egregiously outlandish, not because people are taking cheap shots at the Church. When bishops say things like this, who needs enemies?
Ten years ago Cardinal Law proved to everybody in the whole world except the Vatican that he was a thoroughly incompetent judge of people’s character. So the Vatican sent him to Rome where he was a member of the Congregation for the Clergy which vets potential bishops.
Given that people such as C. Law determine who our bishops shall be, is it any wonder that Rome sends us bishops like these? Holy Spirit, help us!
David G.’s OTOH #1 (1/9/12 12:29pm), the possibility of a misreading of the Cardinal by Bishop Fernandez, looks less likely, given background on Cardinal Ennio Antonelli. His comments opening a recent Theological-Pastoral Congress of Mexico required an immediate “Clarification of Statement on Homosexuality” posted by Zenit (1/15/2009) due to the “various interpretations” that had been made.
His first clarified point is “1. Homosexuality is not a necessary component of society, as is the family.” A detailed amplification follows. His last is “3. The Church maintains its preoccupation of welcoming and accompanying homosexual persons.”
http://www.zenit.org/article-24800?l=english
Thanks for sharing this Jack. It makes me so verrrrrrrrry eager to run back to the loving arms of Mother Church.
“— these more “simple” people should like to be left alone to run and organize their own societies.” Like in Germany ca 1938, maybe? How about Rwanda, 1994?
In light of your comment tell us Jimmy; would you have the UN tell those folks how to run/organize their societies?