quinta-feira, 3 de setembro de 2015

Livro: Manipulação do Sínodo da Família pelo Vaticano


Edward Pentin é um experiente repórter inglês que cobre o Vaticano há muitos anos. Ele ficou famoso mundialmente no ano passado, ao mostrar o que o cardeal Kasper pensa sobre os sesus colegas da África. Falei disso aqui no blog, duas vezes, aqui e aqui.

Pentin, que tem um blog, agora está apresentando um livro que joga suspeitas de que o sínodo da família do ano passado sofreu tentativa de manipulação por parte do Vaticano, para que fossem aprovadas as teses de Kasper sobre divórcio e casamento gay.

Foto do livro acima, que se chama The Rigging of a Vatican Synod? ( Aparelhamento (ou Manipulação de um Sínodo do Vaticano?).

O próprio autor, disponibilizou um excerto do seu livro no site The Catholic World Report.

No excerto, Pentin mostra que muitos bispos ficaram zangados pela publicação e divulgação pelo Vaticano do documento chamado The Interim Report, quando o documento não refletia o que os bispos falaram durantes os debates, e nem tinha tido a a aceitação da maioria. 

Os bispos e cardeais que não aprovaram o documento foram bastante agressivos contra essa atitude do Vaticano de impor um leitura do que seria a misericórdia da Igreja, abandonando a Doutrina da Igreja e como se Igreja não fosse misericordiosa antes do Papa Francisco. Eles ficaram bastante chateados especialmente com a parte chamada "Bem-vindo Homossexuais".

As acusações de manipulação recaem especialmente sobre o arcebispo Bruno Forte, conhecido por visões "progressistas". Mas é claro que ficam sempre suspeitas sobre o próprio Papa Francisco, que teve acesso ao documento Interim Report antes da divulgação. 

Forte terá as mesmas funções no sínodo da família desse ano, mas acho que os bispos e cardeais estão mais espertos.

Vejamos abaixo a parte do livro divulgada por Pentin:

The Interim Report

What had provoked many to allege rigging of the meeting, both inside and outside the synod hall, was the publication on October 13 of the Relatio post disceptationem, or interim report, on the first week of the synod’s discussions.

Many synod fathers were angry that the Relatio did not represent the majority view of the synod’s participants or the discussion that had occurred during the week and was issued without them seeing it.

George Cardinal Pell, prefect of the Secretariat for the Economy, was the first to protest in a debate in the aula on the day of the Relatio’s release, followed by a number of heated interventions. 

Concerned that the report would go out without anyone remarking on it, he pointed out what was good about the report, but he also noted some serious deficiencies in the text. The Australian cardinal had to persist in his protest in the face of the synod managers who would have liked him to be quiet, sources who were present said.

In a television interview on October 16 with Catholic News Service, Cardinal Pell said the document was “tendentious, skewed, it didn’t represent accurately the feelings of the synod fathers.” He said “three-quarters” of those who discussed it afterward “had some problems with the document”. He added that “a major absence” in the document was scriptural teaching and “a treatment of the Church tradition”.

“It was as though there was an idealized vision of every imperfect situation”, Cardinal Pell said. “One father said to me…that he wouldn’t want his young adult children to read it because they’d be confused, and that was said in some of the working groups.”

The interim report “created an impression that the teaching of the Church has been merciless so far, as if the teaching of mercy were beginning only now”, said Polish Archbishop Stanislaw Gadecki of Poznan.

At issue were three controversial paragraphs the contents of which had been barely, or not at all, discussed by the synod fathers. One of these paragraphs referred to proposals, supposedly made by some of the synod participants, for readmission of divorced and civilly remarried Catholics to Holy Communion, and two other paragraphs dealt with the pastoral care of homosexuals and cohabiting couples.

The most contentious paragraphs were under the heading “Welcoming homosexuals”. The section started off by saying homosexuals “have gifts and qualities to offer to the Christian community”, adding: “Are our communities capable of providing (a welcoming home), accepting and valuing their sexual orientation without compromising Catholic doctrine on the family and matrimony?”

It continued: “Without denying the moral problems connected to homosexual unions, it has to be noted that there are cases in which mutual aid to the point of sacrifice constitutes a precious support in the life of the partners.”

Critics pointed out that there was no reference to Catholic doctrine that sexual relations between people of the same sex are “intrinsically disordered”, that the acts are gravely sinful (or sinful at all), or that homosexual orientation was “objectively disordered”.

In an interview on October 17, Cardinal Burke described the interim report as a “gravely flawed document that does not express adequately the teaching and discipline of the Church and, in some aspects, propagates doctrinal error and a false pastoral approach”.

Trying to explain how the document came to be, Cardinal Erdö told Vatican Radio that the sixteen officials who drafted the report struggled to synthesize the positions of thirty to forty bishops on any given topic and rushed to finish it on time. He acknowledged that there may have been instances when the report said “many” bishops had proposed a certain position when only “some” had, the Associated Press reported.

Archbishop Bruno Forte, the synod’s special secretary, was widely considered to have been the main author of the document. He had been known for his “progressive” positions and for earnestly promoting changes in pastoral practice toward people in “irregular” unions, while claiming these changes are true to Catholic doctrine.

The Italian theologian, together with all the members of the drafting committee, drew on the lengthy written speeches of each synod father submitted prior to the meeting. Apparently, certain points from these written speeches found their way into the draft report, even if the bishops had not mentioned them during the four minutes allotted to each speaker. Vatican spokesman Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi said he recalled only one speech out of about 265 that discussed homosexuals during the debate.

Defenders of the report, therefore, say it is not surprising that much did not seem familiar in the interim report because the written submissions were not made public or distributed to the bishops themselves. The oral presentations only reflected a summary or particular point that a bishop wanted to make. As none of the verbal interventions was transcribed, it would also have been difficult to work on summarizing every synod father’s submitted intervention and then adjust it as the synod went on according to what the synod father said in the synod hall. Also, as the interim document, it had to be produced quickly so it could form the basis of discussions for the second week.

Father Stephen Fawcett, an assistant at the synod responsible for keeping an official diary of the entire proceedings, said that “in fairness to them [those who drafted the report], it was a huge task because you had the Lineamenta [guidelines for the synod] that came out beforehand and was seventy-five pages long. Then you had 182 synod fathers making 189 inputs. There were also five hours of free debate, and in forty-eight hours they had to summarize accurately all of that into fourteen pages in five languages. That’s a hard task.”

But he added: “On the other side, I don’t think anyone could say it was all a summary of the discussions. It just was not.”

The inclusion of the homosexual issue into the interim document seemed to upset Cardinal Erdö, who, as general relator, was responsible for the document’s contents. This, too, made many critics suspect that some kind of manipulation had taken place. Asked about the relevant paragraph during an October 13 press briefing on the report, he handed the floor to Forte, saying: “He who wrote the text must know what it is talking about.”

Associated Press reporter Nicole Winfield wrote that there was “no real way to know which bishop or bishops had proposed such ground-breaking language or whether it was more a reflection of Forte’s view”. As time went on, however, it was revealed that during the first week at most only three synod fathers referred to the same-sex issue. According to one source who was present in the synod hall, it “wasn’t an issue”, but was “made into an issue by the way the report was handled by the synod managers.” One synod participant, also speaking on condition of anonymity, said the Church is normally “very accurate” in the words she chooses, and “we never use that language.” Those paragraphs, he said, “didn’t even come close to coming up, so it’s not realistic to think that phrase was accidentally introduced.” He said the passages “bore no relation” to theLineamenta or the discussions but “came out of the blue.”

Speaking to reporters the day after the report was made public, Wilfrid Cardinal Napier, the archbishop of Durban, said the document was not what they were saying at all, adding: “Just like you, I was surprised that it was published.” He said the media saw the document “before we got it, so we couldn’t have possibly agreed on it.”

One eyewitness at the synod on the morning of the release of the interim Relatio recalled a synod father commenting, after hearing the document read out in the synod hall, that he would be “nervous about this document if it was going to go to the press”.

“Is it?” he asked the synod managers. “Err, it already has”, one of them replied, according to the eyewitness, adding: “We sent it to the press before we read it to you.”

The six-thousand-word Relatio was also translated into several languages just forty-eight hours after it was published. For many critics, this amounts to further evidence that at least some of it had been written before the first week of discussions had ended or possibly even before the synod had even started.

Cardinal Napier, one of the fifteen members of the permanent council of the synod, noted how the interim report was received by the media, which portrayed the Church as making a “stunning” and “revolutionary” step toward accepting homosexual activity as morally legitimate. Once such media perceptions are “out there”, he observed, “there’s no way of retrieving them.”

For critics, it is clear that anyone with foreknowledge of the Relatio could have predicted the media’s response. Even Father Lombardi admitted as much at a press conference on October 15, telling reporters it was “something all of us with anything to do with communications could have foreseen.” 

So it seems reasonable to conclude that whoever was behind the release of the document to the media most likely knew the impact it would have and effectively sent it over the heads of the synod fathers in addition, it seemed at the time, to that of the pope.

Behind the scenes, synod officials came under fire from synod participants for the way the interim report was communicated, with some arguing that the incident highlighted the need for a decisive synod communications strategy. “No interim report has ever generated news—ever”, observed Austen Ivereigh, author of The Great Reformer: Francis and the Making of a Radical Pope. “They should have anticipated it.”

Ivereigh, who is also co-founder of Catholic Voices, a group aimed at improving the Church’s representation in the media, believes it highly unlikely that the report was part of a wider strategy to influence public opinion in order to put pressure on the Church to change, as that would not be consistent with the personality of Francis.

“If some people in the synod were trying to do that, or thought that is what really would happen, they really don’t get Francis and they don’t understand the Church.” Francis, he said, “would abhor any attempt to put pressure on the synod from the outside, to an extent that I think would surprise people.” Ivereigh, a former deputy editor of The Tablet, said the pope “hates the idea of lobby groups, self-interested groups, ideological groups.”

At the time of the publication of the interim report, the Vatican would not be explicit about whether the pope had seen it prior to publication. When I asked Father Lombardi at a press conference on October 15 if Pope Francis had read it before it was published, the Vatican spokesman said he was tired of simply having to reiterate that it was standard procedure to send out the report, implying that the pope perhaps okayed it without reading it. He was unable to say definitively if he had read it.

This seemed probable as such documents are usually published during a synod, but normally they are in Latin, never make news, and few therefore pay much attention to them. One theory at the time was that the pope, trusting the document would be acceptable and routine, simply left it to the synod of bishops to deal with as they felt appropriate.

Eventually, nearly four months after the synod, Lorenzo Cardinal Baldisseri, secretary general of the synod of bishops, acknowledged that the pope had “seen and approved” the document. “This point is important not only because of his authority, but also it puts the Secretary General at ease”, Baldisseri said in an interview with Aleteia in January 2015.

Reflecting on the events of that week, Cardinal Napier told me he knew there was something wrong as soon as he heard the report being read. “What’s this? Everything’s been put in such a positive light”, he recalled. “I didn’t know then that the media already had received it before us! Indeed, it had gone onto the wavebands even before we got to discussing it.”

“It was so unfair, just unbelievable”, said Fawcett. “It just didn’t seem like the synod I was at, what I was reading [in the press].” But he said the way the press reported was not completely surprising when he later saw what they had been fed by the synod releases, so he did not think it was entirely the fault of the press. “I don’t actually think the press was completely to blame at all, but I just couldn’t relate what was being reported to the synod I had attended.”

Cardinal Napier remembered listening to the BBC in the morning and hearing the reporters “telling us how the Catholic Church was changing its policy on gay unions on this, that, and the other regard. We hadn’t even discussed this thing, where is this coming from? When the document was read to us, we learned where it was coming from.” By that, the cardinal meant the General Secretariat of the synod.

Asked how the Relatio was received by the synod fathers in general, Cardinal Napier said: “Oh, there was an explosion. And it got worse.”

They received the document on Monday morning of the second week of the synod, and so they had not had a chance to read it before they went into small working groups. During the coffee break, some members of Napier’s discussion group came across reports on the Relatio in the press, and Napier advised his group to take a closer look at these at the end of the session.

He and other moderators and secretaries of the working groups were then summoned to a meeting with Cardinal Baldisseri in the aula. “That was a hot one”, he said. “That’s when I realized how angry people were. That’s when they started describing the reaction of their groups.”

Cardinal Napier remembers a synod father saying he had put his name to the document, but it was not what he had written. “Others asked: How then could this be stated as coming from the synod when the synod hasn’t even discussed it yet?”

Another synod participant added his voice of concern, saying, “there are things said there about the synod saying this, that, and the other, but nobody ever said them. So that’s when it became plain that there was some engineering going on”, the South African cardinal recalled.

George Weigel, biographer of Pope Saint John Paul II, wrote in a January article for First Things that the interim report “really put iron into the spines of many synod fathers”. The document, he said,
was supposed to be a snapshot of the principal themes of the first week’s debates in the general synod assembly, which were to be further explored and refined in the language-based discussion groups during the synod’s second week. But Forte crafted it as a draft final synod document, highlighting issues that would be of greatest interest to an international media eagerly awaiting the Great Catholic Cave-In to the sexual revolution—and found himself, and the interim report, essentially disowned by Cardinal Péter Erdö, the synod’s relator (or official summarizer), at the press conference at which the interim report was presented.

Veteran Vaticanista Sandro Magister said the “openness” at the synod to Holy Communion for the civilly divorced and remarried “and the startling change of paradigm on the issue of homosexuality” that found its way into the interim report “would not have been possible without a series of skillfully calculated steps on the part of those who had and have control of the procedures”.

One source very close to the synod process said if the three controversial paragraphs had never appeared, the synod fathers would have “never talked about the doctrinal issues. It would never have been an issue”, he said. “That’s what really made them wake up to the fact that the doctrinal part was missing in the document.” He said he is expecting it to be a “lesson learned”. Archbishop Forte remains special secretary for the October 2015 synod, he noted, but he believes “the process is going to change.”

---

Pentin deu uma entrevista sobre o livro. Ele fala que como havia fortes suspeitas de que o sínodo havia sido manipulado para aprovar uma "agenda progressista", assim achou que seria relevante que os católicos soubessem disso.

Por sinal, não é uma foto de Chesterton na estante?

Vejam abaixo o vídeo da entrevista.






quarta-feira, 2 de setembro de 2015

Cardeais Africanos se levantam em Defesa da Família Tradicional


Mais um livro foi lançado em defesa da família tradicional, no momento em que se aproxima o sínodo da família, no qual alguns cardeias querem liberar casamento e comunhão para gays e divorciados.

Como diz Sandro Magister, no ano passado 5 cardeais se levantaram escreveram um livro contra tentativas de mudança na definição de família. Esse ano, mas são mais de 20 cardeais/arcebispos que se levantam. Eu já falei aqui de um livro escrito por 11 cardeais, agora aparece um outro livro escrito também por cardeais, sendo que são apenas da África (imagem do livro acima). Esse livro contém também 11 autores, sendo 7 cardeais e o restante é bispo ou arcebispo da África.

Magister selecionou algumas partes do livro que critica fortemente o documento do Vaticano que estimula o debate do sínodo ( chamado de Lineamenta).

As partes que Magister escolheu do livro dizem que a Igreja parece querer voltar ao tempo de Moisés que foi criticado por Cristo por permitir o divórcio e que a Igreja está gerando muita confusão.

Vejamos as partes do livro mostradas por Magister:

- "A PERPLEXING POINT"

"In paragraph 14, the document seems to insinuate that insisting on the indissolubility of marriage would be synonymous with subjugating persons, and it gives the impression that it takes the mosaic model for granted, since, it says, Jesus himself refers to it. Are we supposed to return, then, to the era of 'hardness of heart' in the pre-Gospel period?…".

- "UNACCETTABLE, SCANDALOUS POINTS"

"From the perplexing, we move on to the unacceptable. Could it be that the document, in paragraph 27, is advocating trial marriage as a path to be followed? […] In many regions of Africa where customs prescribe an 'indissoluble traditional marriage' – one that is therefore more stable than civil marriage – the local Church is not even authorized to use such language. If she did, not only would she ruin her pastoral ministry to families, but she would also be in contradiction with the Gospel and would scandalize the pagans…".

- "THE RESULTS OF CONFUSION: SET GOD AND DOCTRINE ASIDE, AND YOU CREATE MAJOR PASTORAL CONFUSION"

"It is astonishing that the same document that clearly notes in paragraph 5 that there is a 'crisis of faith, witnessed among a great many Catholics, which oftentimes underlies the crisis in marriage and the family' draws no conclusions from that fact. Why does it not say that the first challenge to address is the crisis of faith? Why does it seek, in paragraph 33, in one particularly disconcerting perspective, to proceed to renew the Church’s way of speaking about situations that are objectively contrary to the Gospel as though it were merely a matter of 'words' or 'language'?…".


Rezemos por esses cardeais que lutam em defesa de Cristo, dentro da própria Igreja.


terça-feira, 1 de setembro de 2015

Pedaço do Alcorão é Anterior a Maomé


Teste de carbono 14 mostrou que fragmento encontrado em Birgmingham no mês passado, de texto que faz parte do Alcorão, é datado antes do (suposto) nascimento de Maomé.

O especialista em Islã, Robert Spencer, escreveu um livro mostrando que as evidências de que Maomé existou são parcas. Agora o que esse fragmento está mostrando é que o Alcorão foi montado a partir de textos anteriores à data que Maomé supostamente existiu. E assim a ideia do Islã de que Maomé recebeu o Alcorão do anjo Gabriel seria negada.

Isto tudo reforça a ideia de que o Islã pode ter sido uma religião criada usando textos existentes antes da vida de Maomé (se é que ele existiu), para justificar religiosamente uma dominação militar.

Vejamos texto do jornal inglês MailOnline:

The 'Birmingham Koran' fragment that could shake Islam after carbon-dating suggests it is OLDER than the Prophet Muhammad



  • Fragments of the oldest Koran were discovered last month in Birmingham
  • Carbon dating found the pages were produced between 568AD and 654AD 
  • But several historians now say that the parchment may predate Muhammad
  • They believe that this discovery could rewrite the early history of Islam

Fragments of the world's oldest Koran, found in Birmingham last month, may predate the Prophet Muhammad and could even rewrite the early history of Islam, according to scholars.

The pages, thought to be between 1,448 and 1,371 years old, were discovered bound within the pages of another Koran from the late seventh century at the library of the University of Birmingham.

Written in ink in an early form of Arabic script on parchment made from animal skin, the pages contain parts of the Suras, or chapters, 18 to 20, which may have been written by someone who actually knew the Prophet Muhammad - founder of the Islamic faith.

The pages were carbon-dated by experts at the University of Oxford, a process which showed the Islamic holy book manuscript could be the oldest Koran in the world.

The discovery was said to be particularly significant as in the early years of Islam, the Koran was thought to have been memorised and passed down orally rather written.

But now several historians have said that the parchment might even predate Muhammad.
It is believed that the Birmingham Koran was produced between 568AD and 645AD, while the dates usually given for Muhammad are between 570AD and 632AD.

Historian Tom Holland, told the Times: 'It destabilises, to put it mildly, the idea that we can know anything with certainty about how the Koran emerged - and that in turn has implications for the history of Muhammad and the Companions.'

Keith Small, from the University of Oxford's Bodleian Library, added: 'This gives more ground to what have been peripheral views of the Koran's genesis, like that Muhammad and his early followers used a text that was already in existence and shaped it to fit their own political and theological agenda, rather than Muhammad receiving a revelation from heaven.

However, these claims are strongly disputed by Muslim scholars, with Mustafa Shah from the School of Oriental and African Studies in London also telling the paper: 'If anything, the manuscript has consolidated traditional accounts of the Koran's origins.'

The Prophet Muhammad is thought to have founded Islam sometime after 610AD and the first Muslim community was founded in Medina in 622AD.

During this time the Koran was memorised and recited orally but Caliph Abu Bakr, the first leader of the Muslim community after Muhammad's death, ordered the Koranic material to be collected into a book.

The final authoritative written form was not completed until 650AD under the third leader Caliph Uthman.

Professor Nadir Dinshaw, who studies interreligious relations at the University of Birmingham, described the discovery as 'startling'. 

When it was found last month he said: 'This could well take us back to within a few years of the actual founding of Islam.


(Agradeço a informação ao site Jihad Watch)

segunda-feira, 31 de agosto de 2015

Precisa Ter Coragem para Protestar contra o Mal.


No Brasil, vivemos dias de gigantescos protestos contra o governo. Parece-me cada dia mais perigoso protestar contra o governo, depois que um sindicalista disse que vai defender o governo "com armas nas mãos". É sempre necessário coragem para se levantar contra governos e injustiças.

E por falar em coragem, li ontem que um grupo resolveu protestar contra o Estado Islâmico nas ruas do Iraque.

Nossa Senhora, isso é uma coragem gigantesca!!

O Estado Islâmico prendeu 70 manifestantes, só Deus sabe o que eles sofrerão.

Não estou comparando os protestos no Brasil, com os protestos no Iraque. Nada se compara à crueldade do Estado Islâmico atualmente. Mas é preciso coragem tanto no Brasil, e ainda muito mais no Iraque, para se lutar contra o mal.

Rezemos por eles e por todos que lutam contra verdadeiras injustiças e desgovernos.

Vejamos texto da Fox News, sobre os protestos no Iraque.

WORLD

ISIS detains dozens in Iraqi town after rare street protest


Islamic State militants moved on Saturday to stamp out dissent in a remote western Iraqi town, detaining at least 70 and tying dozens of residents, including tribal leaders, to streetlight poles as a punishment, security officials said.
The crackdown followed a rare street demonstration on Saturday to protest the extremist group's execution of a local resident, they said. The protest by hundreds of residents in Rutbah, in Anbar province, was triggered by the execution earlier on Saturday of Munir al-Kobeisi, a civil servant, for killing an IS member. The killing was part of a long-running blood feud between two local clans.
Eid Amash, a spokesman for Anbar's provincial government, confirmed al-Kobeisi's execution and the subsequent protest.
Relying on sketchy information from Rutbah, in Iraq's far west near the Jordanian border, the officials said they didn't know the whereabouts of the detained residents. The militants, they said, tied two residents to each light pole and that the town was gripped by fears that the group would carry out mass executions.
Elsewhere in Anbar, much of which is under IS control, a roadside bomb on Saturday hit a border guard convoy making its way to the border crossing of Trebil on the Jordanian border, security officials said.
Five officers were killed in the attack — which bore the hallmarks of the Islamic State group, whose militants are active in the area near the Jordanian and Syrian borders.
The officials also said a pair of roadside bombs killed five people and injured 19 south and west of Baghdad on Saturday. Also in the capital, assailants using pistols fitted with silencers killed two people in the Jihad neighborhood in western Baghdad before they fled in a car.
All officials spoke on condition of anonymity because they were not authorized to speak to the media.

sábado, 29 de agosto de 2015

Livro: Guia Completo do Estado Islâmico



O livro é de Robert Spencer. Qualquer um que estude Islã e terrorismo sabe quanto Spencer sabe sobre essas duas coisas. Para mim, ele é disparado o melhor analista de Islã do mundo.

Já comprei este último livro dele, que explica em detalhes o que é o Estado Islâmico, califado, e como o mundo erroneamente tem combatido essa ameaça terrorista.

O livro já é best seller nos Estados Unidos.

sexta-feira, 28 de agosto de 2015

Carta Aberta: 190 Generais, Almirantes e Brigadeiros dos EUA contra Acordo com o Irã


Esperei para ver se saía em algum site brasileiro essa notícia. Mas não vi. Então, aqui vai. 190 militares aposentados das mais altas patentes dos Estados Unidos assinaram uma carta aberta contra o Acordo com o Irã, que foi assinado em junho entre o Irã e mais seis países (EUA, Alemanha, França, Rússia, China e Reino Unido).

Os militares dizem que, ao contrário, do que se diz, o acordo vai facilitar que o Irã tenha bomba nuclear.

No mesmo dia, que li sobre essa Carta Aberta, li que a ONU declarou que o Irã continua expandindo sua usina nuclear em Parchin, após o Acordo.

Vejamos o que diz a Carta Aberta, divulgado pelo Washington Post. Não coloquei a lista dos 190 generais, almirantes e brigadeiros, são muitos, vejam no link.

É uma carta histórica. E veio em momento que o Congresso dos EUA discute se aprova ou não o Acordo, por isso é direcionada aos líderes do Congresso e não ao Obama que já aprovou o Acordo.







quinta-feira, 27 de agosto de 2015

Crianças como Versão de Windows. Engenharia Genética.


Esta é a capa da The Economist desta semana, trata da ideia de "melhoramento genético" de crianças por pais, para que seus filhos sejam mais inteligentes, mais fortes, mais bonitos, mais altos, tenham mais cabelo, mais....

Rebecca Taylor, bióloga, especialista em questões genéticas, detonou a ideia no blog Creative Minority Report.

Em resumo, ela fala que se o mundo entrar nessa as crianças serão como versão do Windows, haveria uma "corrida genética" sem qualquer moral para conseguir a melhor versão do "pacote genético". Com filhos sendo considerados sempre ultrapassados.  Com seres humanos sendo considerados obsoletos. 

Ai, meu Deus, vou aumentar minhas orações para o futuro que os meus filhos enfrentarão.

Vejam parte do brilhante artigo de Rebecca, leiam todo clicando no link.

The Futility of Enhancing Your Kids



I am sure this is resonating with moms and dads everywhere who are excited about the possibilities of genetic engineering. Parents want the best for their children. We spend money on swimming lessons, piano lessons, tutors, private coaches and the latest gadgets so that they will have an edge over the other kids. We want them to succeed.

But what about going beyond lessons and gadgets and actively giving children a genetic advantage with germ-line genetic enhancements. Sounds fantastic doesn't it? Having the smartest, fastest and best-looking children on the block.

Logically, this is about as far as most people get before they say, "Sign me and my kids up!" But ask yourself what enhancing our children really means. It means being trapped forever in a dangerous biological game of "Keeping up with the Jones."

Bill McKibben, an environmentalist, in his book Enough: Staying Human in an Engineered Age, outlines the trap we will fall into once we begin to enhance our offspring:
...if germline manipulation actually does begin, it seems likely to set off a kind of biological arms race....  Of course, the problem with arms races is that you never really get anywhere. If everyone's adding 30 IQ points, then having an IQ of 150 won't get you any closer to Stanford than you were at the outset. The very first athlete engineered to use twice as much oxygen as the next guy will be unbeatable in the Tour de France - but in no time he'll merely be the new standard. You'll have to do what he did to be in the race, but your upgrades won't put you ahead, merely back on a level playing field.

...So let's say baby Sophie has a state-of-the-art gene job; her parents paid for the proteins discovered by say, 2005 that, on average, yielded 10 extra IQ points. By the time Sophie is five, though, scientists will doubtless have discovered ten more genes linked to intelligence. Now anyone with a platinum card can get 20 IQ points, not to mention a memory boost and a permanent wrinkle-free brow. So by the time Sophie is twenty-five and in the job market, she's already more or less obsolete - the kids coming out of college just plain have better hardware.

...The vision of one's child as a nearly useless copy of Windows 95 should make parents fight like hell to make sure we never get started down this path. But the vision gets lost easily in the gushing excitement about "improving" the opportunities for our kids. [emphasis mine]
The typical argument is that enhancements are just like gadgets. We are always upgrading those, so what's the problem upgrading our kids. The problem is that people are not gadgets. People should never be considered obsolete. But that is exactly where enhancements will take us.

Now look and that picture on the cover of The Economist again. The thought of that adorable baby as a "useless copy of Windows 95" makes me want to vomit. This is reason why I bother blogging. I am not a trained writer. (That is obvious.) I do not particularly like it. But if no one stands in front of the genetic augmentation train and tries to stop it, I feel the human race is doomed.


quarta-feira, 26 de agosto de 2015

Orgulho é o Pecado Favorito do Diabo - Diz Exorcista


Dante Alligheri já mostrou isso que diz o exorcista. Aliás, Dante estudou teologia profundamente e talvez tenha até tido inspiração divina, pois sua Divina Comédia retrata os pecados humanos no Inferno e no Purgatório de maneira profunda, brilhante, bela , espetacular. Ele é o maior poeta de todos os tempos. Eu gosto especialmente da maneira que ele retratou o amor, "semente de todo bem, e fonte de todo pecado".

No seu Purgatório, Dante mostrou que o orgulho é o que mais afasta o ser humano do Paraíso, está na base da montanha do Purgatório (foto acima). Depois vem a Inveja, a raiva, a preguiça, e daí vai (imagem acima)

Eu tenho um verdadeira ojeriza ao orgulho. Por exemplo, apesar de os considerar dois ótimos debatedores e conhecedores dos problemas brasileiros, não consigo ler nem Olavo de Carvalho, nem Reinaldo Azevedo, pois o orgulho que eles demonstram de si mesmos muitas vezes é tamanho que eles não confessam os próprios erros e contradições,  e às vezes negam contradições explícitas.Sem falar em seus erros que afrontam a Doutrina Católica.

Hoje leio que um exorcista disse que o pecado favorito do diabo é o orgulho.

Vejamos o texto que saiu no site Breibart:

EXORCIST SAYS THAT THE DEVIL’S ‘FAVORITE SIN’ IS PRIDE


In an interview Monday for the Spanish daily El Mundo, Father Juan José Gallego, the exorcist for the archdiocese of Barcelona, Spain, said that casting out demons is “a very unpleasant job” and that at first he was “really scared” because of his close contact with Satan.
Sometimes during an exorcism, the devil will address him directly, by name, he said.
With a doctorate in theology from the University of St. Thomas Aquinas in Rome, as well as a degree in Philosophy from the University of Barcelona, the priest seems academically well equipped to take on the forces of evil.
He has been an exorcist for nine years, treating some five cases a day, half of which turn out to be a “mental health problem,” he says.
According to the exorcist, the devil speaks all languages and his favorite sin is pride. The celebrated Christian apologist C.S. Lewis once called pride “the great sin” and wrote that “it was through Pride that the devil became the devil: Pride leads to every other vice: it is the complete anti-God state of mind.”
In Father Gallego’s experience, people who are possessed by the devil often “lose consciousness, speak foreign languages, possess incredible strength and are deeply troubled.”
“You see the most proper ladies vomiting and swearing, saying things like ‘The Virgin Mary is a whore,’” he said.
“One boy would have his shirt set on fire by the devil at night, and the demons told him that if he made a pact with them, it would all stop.”
The exorcist said that the most terrifying case he worked on involved an Ecuadorian lady. He was called in by her husband who said that whenever she saw a religious symbol she would lose consciousness and fall to the ground. The priest said that when he arrived the woman was unconscious, and he put on his stole and picked up some holy water, at which the woman began to crawl across the floor like a snake.
“I threw holy water on her and she writhed as it burned her. Her three-year-old son attempted to approach her and she tried to attack him. We had to take the child away. Then she came at me.”
“I remember another case: a demon-possessed 16-year-old boy with no studies who said to me in perfect Latin: ‘I order you never to say the Lord’s Prayer again.’”
The first thing he says during an exorcism is: “Lord Jesus Christ, Word of God the Father, God of all creation, you gave the holy apostles the power to subdue demons in your name and full authority to crush the enemy.”
Asked whether the devil ever laughs, he replied that he does, in the most sarcastic way. “The devil is completely embittered,” he said.
Still, according to the exorcist, the greatest victory of the devil is “making people believe he doesn’t exist.”