Kiwiblog

The Herald reports:

The Vatican’s top bioethics official yesterday dismissed calls for his resignation following an uproar over his defence of doctors who aborted the twin fetuses of a 9-year-old child who was raped by her stepfather.

Monsignor Renato Fisichella said he refused to respond to five members of the Vatican’s Pontifical Academy for Life who questioned his suitability to lead the institution.

Fisichella wrote an article in the Vatican’s newspaper in March last year saying the Brazilian doctors didn’t deserve excommunication as mandated by church law because they were saving the girl’s life.

A common sense and humane view from the Archbishop.

AP reports:

In a synagogue visit haunted by history, Pope Benedict XVI and Jewish leaders sparred over the record of the World War II-era Pope during the Holocaust and agreed on the need to strengthen Catholic-Jewish relations.

Both sides said the visit to the seat of the oldest Jewish community in the diaspora was an occasion to overcome what Benedict called “every misconception and prejudice”.

Signs of the Jewish community’s tragic history were abundant, as the German-born Benedict stopped at a plaque marking where Roman Jews were rounded up by the Nazis in 1943 and at another marking the slaying of a 2-year-old boy in an attack by Palestinian terrorists on the synagogue in 1982.

Benedict defended his predecessor Pius XII against critics, telling the audience that the Vatican had worked quietly to save Jews from the Nazis during World War II.

Many Jews object to Benedict moving Pius towards sainthood, contending that the wartime Pope didn’t do enough to protect Jews from the Holocaust.

My conclusion is that Pius refused to speak up publicly, as he didn’t want to risk the Nazis and Fascists moving against the Church. Now this doesn’t make him a bad person – it was arguably a reasonable decision for the Pope to make.

But in my lay opinion, it should disqualify him from sainthood. Sainthood should not be bestowed when there is significant doubt.

Of course decisions on Sainthood, are decisions for the Catholic Church alone. But if they proceed, they should not be surprised that many will think less of the Church for such a decision.

The Herald reports on a guide put out by the Catholic Church for the 2008 election. They don’t endorse a party or candidates,but do have a checklist of issues people should ask about and take into account.

I’ve managed to locate a full copy of the guide. Here are some of their statements, and my scores:

Every abortion involves taking one person’s life for another person’s reasons.

0 for DPF.

The Church supports stem cell research using adult stem cells or umbilical cord blood, but not creating embryos for the purposes of research and other people’s medication and then discarding them.

And another 0. Very strongly in favour of embryo stem cell research. Their potential is incredible.

Those who support euthanasia and assisted suicide sometimes seek our support by claiming they are acts of mercy.  The Church in contrast sees this as an abandonment of people who most need our care and protection, particularly when they themselves are concerned not to be a burden to others.

And a hat trick of zeros.

Some employment policies and practices affect family life.  For example, families can be deprived of adequate time together, workers may have experienced a reduction in job security and real wages, and children and young people may not be sufficiently protected.

Another zero for me as they rail against liberalising shop trading hours.

Psychologists point out that a father’s love and a mother’s love are different and that each contributes differently to a child’s development.  The Church continues to recognise and respect the need for a child to receive both kinds of love.

This leads into their opposition to same sex marriage and adoption. And yet more zeroes for me.

Ten years ago the Churches joined together in the Hikoi of Hope to ask the government to give more weight to the impact of the economy on people’s lives in the areas of employment, poverty, housing, health and education.  New Zealand now has the lowest unemployment figures in the OECD, but this has not been reflected in improved living standards for the poorest New Zealanders, and inequality continues to grow.  Our Catholic social tradition recognises that the effect on the poorest and most vulnerable members of our community is the measure of our public policies.

And another zero as the words Hikoi of Hope wants to make me vomit. They show no understanding of a country’s need to create the wealth, to be able to share it. Instead they just advocate for higher taxes and higher benefits.

A truly humane society would ensure that people have times of stillness to see more deeply into life; times of quiet to hear from the heart; time for wonder, beauty and thanksgiving – and other things the Treasury cannot count. These are dimensions of life and of being truly human that are squeezed out when the market forces which should be in our service, somehow become our master.

And now they blame poor old Treasury for the fact some people work hard. Yet another zero.

Their other sections are on asylym seekers, international aid, cultural diversity crime and environmental justice. I’m going to save time and give myself a zero for all of them.

The Catholic Church has that rare ability to advocate for almost everything I disagree with. On most social issues they are reactionary and conservative while on economic issues they are to the left of the Alliance. They are equally hostile to social freedoms as they are to economic freedom. My views on the churches can get very passionate because of that.

This must be why when I was entered the church in England where Shakespeare is buried, that my friends expressed surprise that my feet did not catch fire

The BBC reports on seven new sins proclaimed by the Catholic Church.  I would have thought they were doing badly enough the the original sins, they really didn’t have to invent some more.  But here they are:

1. Environmental pollution

2. Genetic manipulation

3. Accumulating excessive wealth

4. Inflicting poverty

5. Drug trafficking and consumption

6. Morally debatable experiments

7. Violation of fundamental rights of human nature

Now they are all quite interesting.

If one includes carbon emissions as pollution, then we are all sinners and should ask God every week to forgive our carbon footprint. A lot cheaper than carbon credits also.

And if GM food results in millions of people not starving, or cures for fatal illnesses, well sorry you scientists – it is still a sin.

And Bill Gates is obviously going to burn in hell. No not for Windows ME but for being rich. Never mind that he donates more to charity and helping people in poverty than anyone else alive.

Inflicting poverty being a sin is also interesting.  Does this make Dr Cullen a sinner as NZ still has poverty? And does this make the Chinese Government non-evil for lifting so many out of poverty?

Consuming drugs is a sin.  Does this include party pills? How about coffee?

And what Vatican spin doctor came up with morally debatable experiments.  What does that even mean?

I might even agree with the one about violating fundamental rights of human nature if they could list what these rights are.

Now The Times lists the seven original sins, and their respective punishments:

1. Pride Broken on the wheel
2. Envy Put in freezing water
3. Gluttony Forced to eat rats, toads, and snakes
4. Lust Smothered in fire and brimstone
5. Anger Dismembered alive
6. Greed Put in cauldrons of boiling oil
7. Sloth Thrown in snake pits

So what might be appropriate punishments for the new sins? My guesses are:

1. Environmental pollution – Drowned in acid rain

2. Genetic manipulation - Stoned to death with organic pumpkins
   

3. Accumulating excessive wealth – death by gerbils with $2 coins tied to them

4. Inflicting poverty – covered with honey and tied and staked out near an anthill

5. Drug trafficking and consumption – water boarding with Diet Coke

6. Morally debatable experiments – Dissection with no anaesthetic

7. Violation of fundamental rights of human nature – forced to listen to circular tape of Al Gore speeches until natural death occurs

In case the Kiwi Party, Sensible Sentencing or Family First read this post, please note the above suggested punishments are satire and should not be included in any manifesto