Venezuela Archbishop Concerned Over Chavez

[bemildred]

CARACAS, Venezuela - A top Catholic archbishop expressed concerns about the direction of President Hugo Chavez's government but said he is not taking sides and hopes to smooth out relations that have been tense for years.

The Roman Catholic Church has been one of the most critical voices against Chavez, who has in turn called the church leadership a "tumor." Some Catholic leaders have expressed concern the president may be accumulating too much power.

---

He did not criticize Chavez's actions but said a concentration of power "has been one of the temptations" under the president's government. "It has been seen in the comments of some officials saying that everything has to be identified with (Chavez's revolutionary) 'process,' and that isn't healthy," Porras said.

However, "it is against the beliefs of the church to be on one side or the other," he added.

Yahoo

[AP]

1. Scratch the surface of accusations of a cocentration of too much power...

...and you tend to find the devolution of power with Chávez.

It's like calling black white and nite day.

The guy can't help being popular to a majority of Venezuelans, but that doesn't mean that that policies they're implementing concentrate powere.

They're actually devolving power to the powerless -- to the people who form his popular support. So I guess what the criticis are really anxious about is that a lot of people are getting a lot of power they used to not have. But compared to what used to pass for government in Venezuela, that a de-concentration of power.

[Bono71]

3. Does Chavez have term limits? If he does, I thik all this

talk about dictatorship is a little misguided. What's the stroy re: term limits?

[radric]

4. Not sure about the term limits...

but I'm not expecting to see Chavez give up power now that he's held on to the office.

[Bono71]

5. I have my doubts about him as well...

But it is a little premature in my estimation to label him a dictator (this goes back to previous discussion/threads).

However, there have been complaints (from human rights groups) about some of the practices of the government, so I was wondering if there were term limits....

[Darranar]

48. He will give up power when he loses an election...

that is the law, and there is nothing to indicate that he will violate it.

[AngryOldDem]

6. Couple of Venezuelan priests were at my church this summer

...and they were living in fear that this man would be elected. It was their opinion that if he got in, he'd be there for life, and Venezuela would devolve into a dictatorship. If I recall, they were afraid that once he got in, he would suspend the law and just take over.

[Bono71]

7. Sounds like what happened where my people are from...

I guess we'll just wait and see....

[AngryOldDem]

11. These guys used to travel to and from extensively....

...last summer they were going back to where they are assigned, somewhere near Caracas, I think. They have taught at a Marianist school here, as well as ministered to the Hispanic community here. Made several trips a year.

I'm going to try to find out if there is any recent news of them. As I recall, they were quite frightened at the prospect of this man coming to power.

[Mika]

59. Where your people are from, the Catholic church pulled out..

..when they could no longer prosper from their private catholic schools and take money out of Cuba, post 1959 revolution. In the early 60's the Cuban government mandated that education is a human right to all Cubans, and that no school (public and private) could charge a fee. The catholic church pulled their schools out of Cuba since no profits could be taken from their private school system. The church's final abuse of Cubans was an op called Pedro Pan.



Church and States plot with Cuban children
http://republican-news.org/archive/1998/January20/22worl.html


Cuban-Americans struggle with memories of childhood airlifts
http://www.cnn.com/US/9801/12/pedro.pan/

[HuckleB]

15. Sounds like the same group that feared the Sandinistas, but

didn't seem to have any problems with Somoza. If they feared Chavez, they certainly haven't taken a real look at the alternatives, or the recent history offered by those alternatives. Perhaps what they feared was a loss of influence.

[Cocoa]

22. I thought of Nicaragua too

and I recall rumors (or proven reports) that Cardinal Obando was being paid by the CIA.

[bvar22]

8. Presidential term in Venezuela is 5 years... no 2nd term.

"Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has called on the country's new constitutional assembly to extend the length of presidential terms to six years and to allow incumbents to be re-elected.

If enacted, it could open the way for President Chavez to stay in power for 12 years."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/413207.stm

[radric]

9. Well, I guess that gives you some idea..

of his intentions..

[bvar22]

13. Yes, popular re-election and serving a 2nd term....

...is sooooo undemocratic.

[HuckleB]

16. LOL!

:hi:

[radric]

18. LOL I'm sure he won't be bothering with..

a popular election after the second term. I'm sure after nationalizing the oil companies there will be too much money available to himself and his cronies to risk anymore .. uncomfortable elections.

[bvar22]

23. I'm not LOL.

Faux News type speculations are contradicted by the FACTS.

Facts are such inconvenient things, aren't they?

[Joe Chi Minh]

38. Cronies? you mean

the poor?

[shadowknows69]

64. then he's only learning from the best "*"

[Bono71]

20. Like I said...we'll have to see how it plays out...

if he is in power 30 years from now, that will give us a better idea...

[HuckleB]

25. Yes, the same goes for the Bushies, Putin, the Saudis, and on and on...

Yet, for some reason, I don't see people saying that, or even bringing up the question. So why is it brought up when it comes to Chavez?

[Bono71]

26. I will bet you a $1,000,000 that Bush is gone in 4 years. That is one law

he will obey. I cannot say that Chavez will be gone when his term ends in 2012 if he is reelected in 2007. We'll have to wait and see.

[HuckleB]

29. I didn't say Bush. I said the Bushies. This isn't a one man deal here.

It's a junta.

[Bono71]

30. Whatever...I am talking about the man...he will step down when

his term ends and we will have a shot to get one of our guys in there in 2008...

I am not saying Chavez is a dictator like some other folks this hemisphere...

[HuckleB]

47. Isn't that convenient.

You are asking questions about him, while not asking questions about others, who have records on human rights far more concerning, especially in historical context. That's what this side thread started to touch on. That's the issue at hand. Why just wonder about Chavez?

[Bono71]

51. If the thread was about Bush or Putin and people where

categorically defending them, I would be writing the same thing. It amazes me how people can condemn (rightly) the right wing nuts but are all fine and dandy when it comes to leftist dictators like Castro...now granted Chavez is democratically elected (unlike Fidel), but if Human Rights Watch has a problem with him, I start to get a little worried...

[HuckleB]

56. LOL!

:eyes:

Looks like you got caught saying something you couldn't defend. Thanks for admitting it.

[Bono71]

60. Admitting what? That I dislike Bush and Castro and that

I have strong misgivings about Chavez? I can defend easily those three positions.

[tkmorris]

33. You can SAY anything you want to

but to suggest that someone will violate the law (maybe) 7 or 8 years from now is irresponsible in the extreme. It suggests an inherent bias against the individual, outside of any factual basis.

[Bono71]

34. Oh get over yourself..."irresponsible in the extreme" lol... the initial

post dealt with a Catholic priest's fears of Chavez and the consolidation of power...groups like Human Rights Watch have had similar concerns...

Get over it.

We'll have to wait and see. That's all I wrote.

[tkmorris]

37. I know what you said

I also know that you never miss an opportunity to say it. You're biased Bono, plain and simple. That's fine, but using the word "dictator" when speaking of Chavez, no matter how theoretical, is just an unjustified smear. The man was democratically elected and when challenged won again, handily. He is the choice of the people, far more so than Bush is, or Clinton was, or any number of other world leaders in recent history.

Dictator? No sir, you can call him PRESIDENT.

[Bono71]

39. Hey illiterate one...where in this thread have I called

him a dictator?

[leesa]

41. Why do you say these baseless things?? He was elected

and just because you slurp up US propaganda doesn't mean he is doing anything wrong. Still believe in the Domino Theory??

[Bono71]

42. I believe Human Rights Watch. n/t

[HuckleB]

46. Where was HRW in the years before he was elected?

The problem with HRW is a lack of context. They're concerns may or may not always be valid, but they seldom put their concerns into historical context.

[Bono71]

52. Talk about convenient...

we ignore HRW when they condemn someone on the left, we applaud them when they condemn someone on the right...that's consistent.

[HuckleB]

57. Nope.

I'm asking a question. Can't you answer it? Please start replying to what I actually write. You have yet to do that.

[Bono71]

61. Write something intelligent and you'll get a response.

[HuckleB]

67. LOL!

It's clear that discussion is not your forte. You tried to push an agenda with too many holes, and I showed you those holes. Instead of acknowledging that, and moving forward with the discussion, you responded to phantom posts, and you spun, spun, spun... and now you've reverted to calling names, something you also did above, with another poster. In other words, you couldn't converse, and you couldn't defend your stance. And now you've chosen to go the low road.

Please, get a mirror. You need one badly.

Goodbye. I won't waste my time anymore with someone who refuses to discuss with honesty and integrity.

[AP]

69. L(ots)O(f)L(abels) = L(ack)O(f)A(rgument)!

[AP]

66. I'd applaud HRW if they'd condemn someone on the right in VZ...

...which they haven't done, AFAICT.

They had plenty of chances. I don't believe they have condemned the coup for a weekend. They also didn't condemn the anti-gov't protestors who killed and injured people with wrist rockets during recall protests, or the sharp shooters who shot pro-government protestors during the coup protests.

HRW's Latin America guy seems to have a blind spot on the right.

[Judi Lynn]

58. I never heard what they had to say about former Pres. Carlos Andres Perez

and his smooth execution of protestors of one of his nasty political decisions. He had them shot in the street. No outcries arose in the States that I'm aware of.....

Here's an interesting article on HRW:

Notes on Human Rights Watch
Macdonald Stainsby

The organization Human Rights Watch (HRW), much like counterpart Amnesty International (AI), is cited often by individuals and organizations of all political creeds and persuasions. Whether it is far-right opponents of Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez or leftist solidarity activists working on helping the beleaguered Palestinian people, it seems a citation from HRW is so respected that it takes on the air of non-ideological and non-partisan, making it so that they stand above the fray of politics. But is this really the case? Well, one of the main issues that can be brought up is simply how the organization pigeon-holes these matters. To deal with this point, I found simply one article on the HRW main webpage (hrw.org) and dissected from there. The article in question is available at:
http://hrw.org/editorials/2003/nigeria120403.htm
And right from the start, it is too deeply woven with imperialist ideology to simply take apart when a line appears that is in favour of Western imperial interests. The White Man’s burden approach to the “Human Rights” and International law implications implied therein are simply astounding. It is not so much what is said but rather how things are framed. The ideology of HRW, much like the major bourgeois media, as has often been said, is like the pane of glass you don’t see, but which really determines the appearance of what you are looking at.
(snip)

Today, anywhere in the world, when a group like HRW starts talking about 'human rights', it is important to try one little trick. It will get you through 95% of those articles with a better understanding then if it is taken without deep, deep cynicism. Try substituting 'property rights' for human rights. Then it becomes easy to see why Blair is 'democratic' and Robert Mugabe, Hugo Chavez and Fidel Castro are lumped together, no matter how different they might be from one another. The same, of course, was true of Slobodan Milosevic. And today, the government of Yugoslavia has just started (in full imperialist occupation) to lift what amounted to martial law after Zoran Djindic—the expert pro-West anti-communist privatizer appointed prime minister—was assassinated. Where is the screaming and howling from HRW about that? Only a few months ago, the Libyan revolutionary leadership announced that it was abandoning the socialist aspects of their revolution. Lo and behold, Qaddafi then is 'coming in from the cold' only months later. Weapons of mass destruction? How about diversions of mass deception.
(snip)

http://www.variant.randomstate.org/21texts/HRW.html

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Didn't hear a word from Human Rights Watch on El Caracazo:

One voice in the anti-Chavez chorus has a familiar ring to his voice. Former President Carlos Andres Perez gives TV and newspaper interviews as an authority on democracy and good government. Convicted of embezzlement and having given the command for army troops to fire at his own people, this mass murderer somehow claims to occupy moral high ground. And the media accepts him as if the Venezuela conflict boils down to questions of procedure, not real democracy: majority rule.

Venezuelans overwhelmingly chose Chavez in 1998 and again in 2000, because they remembered what former presidents did--a memory that neither the media nor human rights groups seem to possess.

On February 27, 1989, Perez increased the price of gasoline and the cost of public transportation. Following an IMF model to garner foreign investment, his austerity policies hit the poorest people hardest. But Perez apparently did not expect Venezuelans to respond to "economic shock" programs with spontaneous protests, which erupted throughout the country. In some areas, rioters torched shops and set up roadblocks.

When the police went on strike, the government lost control. Perez called for a state of emergency. The soldiers fired into crowds. By March 4, the government claimed that 257 lay dead. Some non-governmental sources estimated the death toll at over 2000. Thousands were wounded.

Perez, who called himself a socialist, first imposed draconian measures on the poor and then had them shot when they objected. The Caracazo as the event became known, not only destroyed Venezuela's aura of stability but put an end to the political system that had replaced the ousted military dictator Perez Jimenez in 1958.
(snip/...)

http://counterpunch.org/landau07022004.html

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Anti-Chavez people who turn to mention Chavez's coup against Perez always fail to mention Perez's cruel, stupid, inadequate, and corrupt stretch as President, which ended in his impeachment, and his continuing status as a good friend of George H. W. Bush.

HWR has never been outspoken about that Venezuelan President. They don't seem infallible, do they?

[Bono71]

62. It is illegitimate to defend something or someone by pointing

out something else that is equally or more abhorrent.

[Judi Lynn]

63. No need to defend Hugo Chavez, Boner71. n/t

[Joe Chi Minh]

40. Pray God he does a tenth

for the Venezuelan people, of what Fidel Castro has done for the Cubans.

But I jest. I'm afraid it's a cultural thing with our right wing friends. The notion of a dictator is so alien and hideous to them that it almost causes them anaphylactic shock. They were such financial losers under the likes of Pinochet, Somosa, Videla, Lorscheider et al., weren't they. And how they love democracy!

[Darranar]

49. Oh, yes, the evils of being re-elected!

How dare that vile dictator even dream of it!

[bemildred]

10. He can stay in until 2012, if re-elected in 2007, I believe.

Or something on that order.

[Bono71]

31. Thanks. n/t

[Joe Chi Minh]

44. A good summary,

if I may say so, AP. But, alas, as we all know, there's none so deaf as those that will not hear.

They'll be maundering and whingeing for ever. It would almost seem worth giving them back their wretched monopoly on the country's wealth - but for their immemorial, pathological hatred and grinding of the faces the poor.

[Fridays Child]

2. Looks like the moral values meme has flown south, and why not?

After all, it bitched slapped US liberals so well, the bushistas are, no doubt, very eager to give it a go in Venezuela.

[Judi Lynn]

12. US investigates risk of losing oil supplies from Venezuela

US investigates risk of losing oil supplies from Venezuela
By Andy Webb-Vidal in Caracas and Doug Cameron in Houston
Published: January 13 2005 21:11 | Last updated: January 13 2005 23:15

The US is investigating the risk of losing its share of Venezuela's oil exports as the government of President Hugo Chávez seeks to steer more supplies towards China and other nations.

The US Government Accountability Office (GAO), Congress's non-partisan investigative agency, will examine the potential impact following a request from Richard Lugar, Republican chairman of the Senate foreign relations committee.

Venezuela accounts for about 15 per cent of US crude oil supplies and also has the largest proved reserves in the western hemisphere. Oil prices rose in the US when supplies were disrupted in late 2002 and early 2003 by a strike at Petróleos de Venezuela, the state-owned oil company.

“We must make sure that all contingencies are in place to mitigate the effects of a significant shortfall of Venezuelan oil production, as this could have serious consequences for our nation's security and for the consumer at the pump,” Mr Lugar said in a letter to the GAO, obtained by the FT.

Although another strike is not seen as likely, Mr Chávez has since warned that he would send “not one more drop” of oil to the US if Washington sought to oust him.
(snip/...)

http://news.ft.com/cms/s/c9d0dfa8-65a6-11d9-8ff0-00000e2511c8.html

[David__77]

14. The church should not side with the oligarchs.

There is a democratic revolution taking place. The church was implicated in supporting the fascists who launched a coup and are lucky that certain figures haven't been arrested and prosecuted according to law.

[HuckleB]

17. Exactly.

Spain, Nicaragua, El Salvador... when will the Catholic Church learn its lesson? If it truly stands for the poor and for democracy, then this is hardly legitimate crticism. Chavez has brought more democracy to Venezuela than it has known, possibly ever, and he has certainly done a great deal to level the economic playing field for Venezuelan citizens. For the Bishop to make these remarks makes no sense whatsoever.

[bvar22]

19. Unfortunately, The Catholic Church hierarchy...

...is VERY conservative, and their agenda in Venezuela is to protect their $MONEY$, not the general welfare of the population.

[WMliberal]

21. the archbishop mentioned is another member of the hierarchy appointed

by John Paul to be a counter-Liberation theologian. Of course he's going to say bad things about a guy who believes in helping the poor.

[bin.dare]

24. Porras has a negative history with Chavez since 1999...

... a little reminder of something earlier last year:

Venezuelan bishops demand recall vote

Caracas, Apr 2 (EFE).- Venezuela's Catholic Bishops' Conference repeated Thursday its earlier criticisms of the "authoritarian" government of President Hugo Chavez, and demanded the convening of a referendum to recall him.

In a statement read by the conference chairman, Monsignor Baltazar Porras, the bishops called for the holding of a referendum to recall Chavez - still under consideration by election officials - as a way to "end and overcome the growing division and violence (in Venezuela)."

"The country can no longer tolerate the polarization that (causes fellow Venezuelans to be viewed) as patriots or coup mongers," the statement continued, also warning against the "breakdown of the rule of law" and denouncing the government as a violator of human rights.

(more)
http://aol.countrywatch.com/aol_wire.asp?vCOUNTRY=186&UID=1058062

[WMliberal]

27. and if Porras wasn't archbishop, it'd be a right wing parrot.

**squak. Fuck the meek** **squak. Liberation theology is for commies**

[AP]

28. Oops. What happened to that statement about the church not

taking sides?

[anarchy1999]

32. go here to these sites first for real journalism out of Venezuela.

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/

http://www.narconews.com/

http://www.narconews.com/docs/welcome.html

http://www.narconews.com/Issue35/article1123.html

Cynthia McKinney: “We Need Narco News, and It Needs Us”
A Letter from Georgia's Congresswoman-Elect on the Need for Authentic Media



By Cynthia McKinney
Please Distribute Widely
November 9, 2004

Dear Friend,

I am one of the silver linings to come out of Election Day 2004 in the United States.


Cynthia McKinney
After being driven from my seat in Congress two years ago by a hostile corporate media that seeks to demonize those of us who speak our minds and our hearts against power, the voters of Georgia’s Fourth Congressional District returned me to Washington on November 2nd.

I return to Washington ready to fight.

[gorbal]

70. I like "Truthout's" articles on Chavez

I think the articles on "Truthout" and the interviews and debates on "Democracy Now" really give one a good feeling of what is really going on. (Do searches on Chavez, you'll find alot)

[anarchy1999]

71. go to al giordano and bigleftoutside.

al is and has been writing for many years on what is happening down south. If you want to go, he'll support you.

[Selatius]

35. On the other hand, Chavez should prepare for untimely demise

He needs to set it up so that if he falls, the movement will not collapse in confusion and power struggles. The best way to do that is to adopt a self-management model. The poor folks should be encouraged to form collectives or co-ops so that they would be less easily manipulated and be more able to bargain as one voice against an outside entity, and then the co-ops or collectives should network together to communicate. Working together affords more security and coordination than being atomized and isolated. (No, they should not be forced to collectivize like how Stalin did it; it must come by choice, not by force)

Any democratic organization must be run from the base of the pyramid, not the top of the pyramid. Chavez may have a great deal of power, and the people may be okay with him having the decision-making power, but preparations should be made for long-term sustainability of the movement and the reforms because they should not be caught becoming too dependent upon him or his inner-circle.

[Judi Lynn]

36. HE's a pip, isn't he? A real Venezuelan Jerry Falwell.

From www.venezuelanalysis.com

It is not a secret for anybody in Venezuela, that President Hugo Chavez has criticized (and rightly so) members of the church for their active participation in the April 2002 coup d’etat and their silence when previous administrations ransacked the treasury, ignored the needs of poor population, and acted repressively against popular protests. Mr. Chavez recalls examples when, while working at the Government palace for other administrations as a military attaché, he witnessed the corrupt practice of government high ranking officials handing out cash to clergymen in return for their ignorance of the real problems in society. Due to this position by Mr. Chavez, Porras has been an active and outspoken adversary of the Chavez administration.
(snip)

It is true that poverty, unemployment, corruption, violence, insecurity and some of the other qualifiers currently exist in the Venezuelan society. However, to voice these facts at this time by clergymen, when they have not done so in previous administrations is inexcusable. In Venezuela, these social ailments have existed for many years prior to Mr. Chavez taking control of the government. Invasions of land by poor people were allowed by administrations since the 1960’s as a result of lack of jobs in rural areas, to the point that major metropolitan areas are completely surrounded by shacks and poor neighborhoods. UNESCO rates Venezuela´s poverty rate at 80% of its population, but this figure was calculated prior to Mr. Chavez taking control of the government. Unemployment has risen in the current year due to four strikes in 2002, called for by the business elite. In total, the last strike produced losses in the order of 8 billion dollars to the economy and the subsequent closure of businesses brought the unemployment rate higher. What the pamphlet ignores is that many of these businesses closed after the strike, because the business owners who endorsed the strike wanted to retaliate against the government. By leaving people in the unemployment line, business owners maintained the pressure over the government leaving a large number of workers on a limb to find out new jobs which were no longer available. The implementation of currency exchange controls has precluded more money to leave the fragile economy, and this is a measure that has been applied by previous administrations as a measure to preclude economic chaos.

Mr. Porras brings up these social ailments as if they were new issues that no one else ever noticed before. Mr. Porras mixes the allegations about violence and corruption with an “increase in the presence and activities of subversive groups in the borders”, as if this was a problem that the Chavez administration created. In fact, guerrilla movements in the border with Colombia (which is the border that Mr. Porras is alluding to) has existed for as long as the FARC has been operating in Colombia (over 40 years). The opposition in Venezuela, however, has made up the idea that Mr. Chavez and the government are financing and providing sanctuary to the FARC in Venezuelan territory to discredit the Chavez government in an attempt to persuade the US government to take action against Mr. Chavez. However, Mr. Porras does not condemn the incursion of Colombian paramilitary groups into Venezuelan’s territory and the killings of some Venezuelan troops in violent clashes against this paramilitary.

With respect to human right abuses, the conditions of jails, murders, intimidation, etc., Mr. Porras again mixes issues to confuse the readers. Why is it a concern nowadays that the conditions of jails are inhumane in his opinion, when the conditions of these jails have been a problem for decades? Mr. Porras complains about the lack of respect for the rights of oil workers recently fired. What rights is he talking about? These are oil industry executives and middle class workers who walked out during the strike for two months, committed acts of sabotage, and now they expect to go back to their work places and continue to live in free housing provided by the government-owned oil company (PDVSA) like nothing ever happened? What about the rights of workers who were sent home by business owners, and when they returned to their jobs after the strike, the owners have closed their companies, and the workers did not even receive their forced layoff pay checks as required by law? What about the rights of poor people who have endured previous administrations without these ever providing adequate medical care, adequate education, or any opportunities to better themselves? What about the right of approximately 70 campesinos (land workers) who have been murdered by opposition death squads in the last two years just because they have been given land and financing by the Chavez government?
(snip)

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1038

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Venezuela complains to Vatican about bishop's "meddling"

Caracas, May 25 (EFE).- The vituperative half-decade-old argument between Venezuela's Roman Catholic hierarchy and its leftist-populist government has been ratcheted up another notch by the Chavez administration's complaint to the Vatican that the country's top bishop is meddling in politics.

The Chavez regime on Monday rejected renewed criticism of the government by the head of the Venezuelan Bishops' Conference, Monsignor Baltazar Porras, and said it will lodge an official complaint with the Vatican about the prelate's "proselytizing."

Pro-Chavez congressional leader William Lara blasted Porras' assertions that the government planned to form "popular militias" as part of a new defense strategy announced two weeks ago by the president.

Porras told the Caracas daily El Nacional that Chavez wanted to arm Venezuela's people "so we can kill one another."

Claiming that Porras was "once again telling a bald-faced lie," Lara said Chavez's "integral defense plan" does not entail arming the population but rather promoting the concept of the "co-responsibility" of government and society in safeguarding the country's security.

He said Porras was "usurping the name of the Catholic Church to spread political propaganda," which, according to Lara, goes against Vatican instruction to pastors to occupy themselves principally with their parish's spiritual concerns.
(snip/...)http://www.countrywatch.com/cw_printwire.asp?UID=1109897&vCOUNTRY=

[bin.dare]

43. certainly is if the following is to be believed.

Venezuelan Monsignor Baltazar Porras candidacy for Cardinal rejected by the Vatican

10/24/2003 -- Monsignor Baltazar Porras candidacy for Cardinal of Venezuela has been rejected by the Vatican in Rome according to sources close to the Roman Catholic hierarchy quoted by Diario VEA www.diariovea.com which says that among other objections formulated by clerics assigned to report on Monsignor Porras are:

Conflict with nuns in Merida: a complaint was lodged with the Vatican in a property dispute between Porras and the religious sisters.

Monsignor Porras' clear party-political affiliations within the Venezuelan opposition

Porras' active participation in the April 11, 2002 coup d'etat against President Hugo Chavez Frias

Porras' influence over the late Monsignor Velasco to a sign a protocol confirming the appointment of Dictator-for-a-Day Pedro Carmona Estanga

Venezuelan government investigations related to Porras' identification with terrorist groupings

The position appears to clarify news from Rome earlier in the week that 83-year-old Pope John Paul II had omitted one candidate in a lost of 31 bishops elevated to the Roman Catholic Church's College of Cardinals. Porras had earlier attended ceremonies related to the beatification of Mother Teresa of Calcutta and but was said to have been in an acute state of depression just before the consistory ceremony when he was told his elevation to Cardinal had been put on hold.

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:R97j_37_gI0J:www.vheadline.info/readnews.asp%3Fid%3D12080+Monsignor+Baltazar+Porras+venezuela+vatican&hl=en&lr=lang_en&ie=UTF-8

[Judi Lynn]

45. Isn't that amazing! So glad to see this info.

So people OUTSIDE the Venezuelan opposition, Venezuelan right-wing media, our own MSM see this man as a driven political tool, a loose cannon, and a man NOT doing his job.

He's a slave to the "opposition" and its worship of power, and very far from the "Kingdom of God."

This news is exceptional. Sums him up perfectly. They've got his number at the Vatican.

Hope he snaps out of his depression, poor thing. What the hell did he expect?

[w4rma]

53. So the guy the AP is quoting has been REJECTED by the Catholic hirearcy

AP should stand for Anti-American Propaganda.

[NNN0LHI]

50. I wish the Catholics in America were worried about Republicans...

...wielding too much power. On the contrary, they are encouraging it. Sonuvabitch.

Don

[Bono71]

54. Not this Catholic. Many of us are agianst the Repubs. I think the

Catholics as a group were about 50-50 Kerry-Bush...

[HuckleB]

55. The hierarchy appears to be, that's for sure.

The faithful are still quite divided.

[Tinoire]

65. Priest's death highlights divisions in Venezuelan church

Thank God for "little" priests like Jose Antonio Arrieta and Juan Vives Suria. What would Monsignor Oscar Romero say about this?

When I feed the poor, they call me a saint.
When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.
Dom Header Camara & Archbishop Oscar Romero


Priest's death highlights divisions in Venezuelan church


CARACAS, Venezuela (CNS) -- The death of a prominent priest who supported Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez has drawn attention to divisions within the church between supporters and opponents of a government that has repeatedly clashed with the church hierarchy. Father Juan Vives died June 26 at age 80 of lung cancer. The priest, an early proponent of liberation theology, served as president of Caritas in Venezuela and worked tirelessly to help refugees. He later became a staunch supporter of Chavez, who has been harshly criticized by the church hierarchy over his human rights record. Venezuelan bishops blamed the president for the nation's escalating poverty and accused him of ruling in an authoritarian style. Father Vives was such a staunch ally of Chavez that the day after Father Vives' death, the president called for honoring the priest with applause instead of silence. "We can do no less than ... give tribute to this great patriot, this soldier of Christ," Chavez said.

http://www.americancatholic.org/Features/DailyNews/todays.asp?date=7/16/2004

[HuckleB]

68. Could it be the increase in women's rights that bothers the "Bishop"?

Women and Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution

http://www.venezuelanalysis.com/articles.php?artno=1353

"...

The fight for women’s rights has taken on a new meaning within the Bolivarian Revolution.  With the election of Hugo Chávez Frías in 1998, Venezuela is proposing a democracy based on participation, in which the rights of citizens are not defined as purely political but instead embark on encompassing social justice and equality. Most women look upon this revolution, dedicated to tearing down the formally rigid and exclusive “democracy”, as the beginning of a new phase in the fight for gender equality.  The focus is on no longer fighting for legal rights and political power, but instead changing the complexion of society. 

In one of his first acts as president, Chávez called for a Constituent Assembly to draft a new Constitution that would serve as the catalyst to change the stagnant, exclusionary fabric of Venezuelan society. Thousands of women including, feminists, former guerrillas, housewives, professionals, and members of organizations such as Women for Venezuela and United Women Leaders formed the Constitutional Front of Women of the Fifth Republic Movement (FCMMVR), which educated and organized women to draft demands for the Constitution and to promote the candidacy of feminists to the Constitutional Assembly. With the approval of the new Constitution on December 15th, 1999, Venezuelan women achieved an unprecedented social and political victory, as well as one of the most advanced constitutions in the world.

Often referred to as the non-sexist Magna-Carta, the Venezuelan Constitution guarantees total social, political and economic rights to all citizens. It clearly states that women are entitled to full citizenship, and it addresses discrimination, sexual harassment, and domestic violence. In addition to guaranteeing full equality between men and women in employment, it is the only Constitution in Latin America that that recognizes housework as an economically productive activity, thus entitling housewives to social security benefits (Article 88). By allotting economic privileges to a job that was previously unrecognized as having an economic value, Venezuela is breaking down societal norms and capitalist ideology which exclusively associate value with producing revenue. 

The president of the National Institute for Women, María León, notes, “Our Constitution enhances the struggle against discrimination of human beings, and because of this it includes mechanisms for the protection of all social groups,” and adds “Article 88 is an example to be followed by all countries in their struggle to eradicate discrimination against women.” The Venezuelan Constitution (Article 76) also recognizes the sexual and reproductive rights of women and obliges the state to ensure that doctors provide accurate information about family planning.  It acknowledges the social function of motherhood and guarantees healthcare to the mother, from the moment of conception and during post-partum. Article 75 states that family relations are based in equality of rights and duties, in solidarity, in mutual comprehension and in reciprocal respect. 

..."