IN A week in which the Catholic Church put the crime of sex abuse on par with the “crime” of ordinating women, Venezuela’s President Hugo Chavez described local Catholic leaders as “troglodytes” and “cavemen” and ordered a review of his country’s ties with the Vatican.
The Marxist President also challenged the Pope’s authority, saying he was the Vatican’s head of state but not Christ’s emissary on Earth.
Beautiful plumage: President Chavez with a parrot
Christ does not need an ambassador. Christ is in the people and in those of us who fight for justice and freedom for the humble.
The Vatican revised its in-house rules to deal with clerical sex abuse cases on Thursday, targeting priests who molest the mentally disabled as well as children and doubling the statute of limitations for such crimes.
But abuse victims said the rules are little more than administrative housekeeping since they made few substantive changes to current practice, and what is needed are bold new rules to punish bishops who shield pedophiles.
And women’s ordination groups slammed the new rules because they included the attempted ordination of women as a “grave crime” subject to the same set of procedures and punishments meted out for sex abuse.
Said Erin Saiz Hanna, executive director of the Women’s Ordination Conference, a US-based organisation that works to ordain women as priests, deacons and bishops:
The idea that women seeking to spread the message of God somehow defiles the Eucharist reveals an antiquated, backward church that still views women as unclean and unholy.
The Vatican in 2007 issued a decree saying the attempted ordination of women would result in automatic excommunication for the woman and the priest trying to ordain her. That is repeated in the new document, adding that the priest can also be defrocked—a permanent punishment, whereas an excommunication can be lifted if the person expresses sorrow for what he or she did.
Monsignor Charles Scicluna, the Vatican's sex crimes prosecutor, poses with the Pope
Monsignor Charles Scicluna, the Vatican’s sex crimes prosecutor, defended the inclusion of both sex abuse and ordination of women in the same document as a way of codifying two of the most serious canonical crimes against sacraments and morals that the congregation deals with. Also included are other sacramental crimes, including desecrating the Eucharist and—for the first time—heresy, apostasy and schism.
A day earlier, President Chavez ordered a review of Venezuela’s ties with the Vatican amid tensions between his government and the country’s bishops.
An accord with the Vatican gave privileges to the Catholic Church not enjoyed by other churches, he said.
As Venezuela was a secular country, granting privileges to one particular religious group was a violation of the constitution, Chavez added.
President Chavez and church leaders have been at odds over the years but in recent weeks the differences have once again come to the fore.
The leader of the Venezuelan Catholic Church, Cardinal Jorge Urosa, has been publicly critical of the Chavez government, most recently decrying the authorities’ handling of a corruption scandal over spoiled food.
On 12 July, the Venezuelan bishops’ conference expressed concern that “ideological and political polarisation” was creating a hostile environment ahead of the legislative elections on 26 September.
Mr Chavez has accused church leaders, who he has labelled as “troglodytes” and “cavemen”, of siding with the opposition.
He said they should stay out of politics and stop trying to instil fear in people by calling him a Marxist.
I am Marxist, but before Marxist I’m deeply Christian.
Hat tip: Holland, Broadsword & Marcus
The Freethinker was founded in 1881 by GW Foote, an outspoken critic of religion. After the publication of 
July 16th, 2010 at 10:04 am
Story speaks for itself, really. So I’m confining comment to captioning the Chavez photo. I think the parrot’s just said:
“I’m through talking to you until you lose the Boy Scout uniform!â€
July 16th, 2010 at 12:08 pm
Actually the first time Chavez said something I could agree with.
I would like to title the photograph “aarh, Jim lad”.
July 16th, 2010 at 12:23 pm
Lucky that Ratzinger still remains best friends with the UK government and will be welcomed here at a cost of north of £100 million (£200 million has been mentioned) if you add in the security. UK must be rolling in cash if it can throw this kind of money on a freebie for the RCs. Well, not quite a freebie as they are hoping to raise a few million themselves. But why should they pay when there are suckers like the rest of us willing to be screwed or at least not able to do anything about it.
July 16th, 2010 at 2:01 pm
Let’s hope he kicks them out and does away with the Concordat. Might be the push needed in the rest of South America to take the catholic church down a peg or two.
July 16th, 2010 at 2:28 pm
The boys in the Vatican are really having a blast, piling up new fatwas. I’m almost sure some people in Downing Street are cursing Gordon Brown for inviting the pope, as this seems to become a very expensive fiasco. And there may be more by the time Ratzinger sets foot on UK soil.
July 16th, 2010 at 2:47 pm
I could understand why Phony Tony Blair would invite Ratzinger but why would Gordon Brown? Brown is a product of the kirk, I think his father was a Minister, and their views tend to be an unwavering detestation of RCs. This could be Brown’s revenge as the fiasco on Ratzinger gathers pace and the crazy comments and comparisons from Ratzo and Co continue. These seem like the screams of panic from a bunch of increasingly obvious weirdos desperate to distract attention from the accusations being levelled against them.
July 16th, 2010 at 2:49 pm
I would hazard a guess that Brown would invite Ratslinger because he knew the Tories would be faced with the choice of picking up the bill or offending catholics.
July 16th, 2010 at 3:52 pm
I think the Vatican needs to find some new PR people as the ones they have are frekking useless..
Everytime the wizened old homophobic dress wearing Ratzi the Nazi opens his mouth he pisses off huge swathes of his congregations…. let’s hope he keeps on doing this and his evil perverted child molesting protecting Church dies a quick death.
I still think he should pay for his own holidays in the UK…the Governments pathetic lily-livered response to the petition to stop him coming was the biggest load of hogwash I’ve ever read.
Sell the Vatican Feed the World
July 16th, 2010 at 4:40 pm
Just a query.
In the UK all people working with children have to screened by the relevant authorities. Can anyone tell me if priests have to be screened? Something tells me not.
July 16th, 2010 at 4:50 pm
Hopefully, Chavez will ignite further anti-catholic feeling in South America and by breaking the Concordat in his country, encourage other states to do the same.
July 16th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
I now read that the BBC, headed by a high profile RC, intends to arrange wall to wall coverage of Ratzo’s visit. Who decided on this? How much will it cost? Isn’t there a Board of Governors or whatever who have some views? Oh, I forgot, this is the same supine bunch who decided that an occasional appearance on the dire Thought for the Day by a sceptic must not be allowed. At the same time they will spend zillions producing coverage of Ratzo.
Ever think that we don’t live in a responsive democracy? An unelected and unaccountabe House of Lords; an unelected Queen who cannot be critcised by our supposed democratic government and is very religious and a homeopathy enthusiast, an heir to the throne who enthuses about Islam and sharia law and we are suffocating in religious crap on the airwaves and religious privileges about tax and forced to hire chaplains on the NHS and in the military when we are short of doctors and nurses.
July 16th, 2010 at 5:00 pm
Hugo chavez the dicatator taking the moral high ground over the catholic church, riiiiiiiight.
July 16th, 2010 at 5:35 pm
By speaking out the RCC has upset Chavez as he moves closer to becoming outright dictator of Venezuela. Love him or hate him, Hugo is right. Religion should have no role in a secular state and the left-footers have irked a man with the power, and the balls, to cause them pain. “Christ doesn’t need an ambassador”, is an excellent statement I’m sure will have found it’s way back to Ratty who knows his church has been ripped apart with just a few words.
Side issue. In some pics where his face has no expression, I think Chavez has the appearance of an Easter Island head.
July 16th, 2010 at 7:03 pm
“Christ doesn’t need an ambassador.” What does it tell you about Ratzo’s god if the RC Church is infested with paedo priests, nuns who in the infliction of pain would have made great Concentration Camp guards and a Pope who shames himself in relying on a Diplomatic Imunity granted by a fascist Mussoli to one of his predecessors. Moreover, what does it tell you about a former British PM who invited the same Pope to the UK and the present PM prepared, in a time of financial hardship for many, who agrees to underwrite the outrageous costs of the visit. And a BBC, which denies freedom of speech to atheists on Thought for the Day, but is prepared to spend huge sums of licence payers money to offer wall to wall coverage of the freebie.
How onjective was the BBC decision? How much was it the decison of the high profile Roman Catholic Director General, Mark Thompson? Are the BBC Governors happy with this grotesque abuse of the licence fee?
July 16th, 2010 at 7:14 pm
Broga
Your love for the BBC is well known to regular contributors here.
I wonder what chance you have of getting a letter read out on “Points of View”, if it’s still broadcast?
Do you remember the Barry Took spoof on “Not The Nine o’Clock News”, Mr Mulligan?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4lzS8yW8INA
July 16th, 2010 at 7:49 pm
My doctor has advised me on no account to watch Points of View, because of my high blood pressure. However, I do wish that they would bring back The Epilogue, as a fitting way to end the day:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KHJo5K2mlyo
July 16th, 2010 at 7:50 pm
This was very funny as well, and is quite topical!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pRwfwYGTPd8
July 16th, 2010 at 7:59 pm
Chavez and the RCC have quite a history of antipathy. According to the following link, his outburst against the Pope will allow the Vatican to accuse him of blasphemy. Of interest too is that he would like to exclude religion from Venezuelan schools:
http://english.pravda.ru/world/americas/114253-0/
July 16th, 2010 at 10:27 pm
Chavez? Doing something good for once? Hell… has been frozen. The parrot, still with the highest intellect in that photo, is amazed that the gorilla with a peanut brain took a moral high ground.
July 16th, 2010 at 10:27 pm
Quite frankly, this is the funniest thing Spike ever said:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....eature=fvw
July 16th, 2010 at 10:34 pm
“Troglodytes and cavemen” Chavez sums them up. So what is all this about heresy and apostasy? Is Ratty thinking of reinstating the Inquisition or something?
July 17th, 2010 at 12:34 am
Hugo chavez’s claim that America caused the recent earthquake in haiti is just as moronic as anything the catholic church ever said, it was probably that parrot that put him up to it
July 17th, 2010 at 12:45 pm
@Broadsword. There are aspects of the BBC I enjoy and admire. I think the World Service is excellent, much of the To-Day programme, often Radio 3, and many of the satirical comedy programmes. However, the reaction of the Board of Governors to the temperate, detailed and well researched NSS document asking for an occasional appearance on Thought for the Day hit the depths as did Mark Thompson’s ex cathedra (no doubt following in the steps of his revered leader Ratzinger) that he would not permit views “not of the faith.” The endemic presence of religious soft soaping is everywhere on the BBC and one of the worst places I have strayed into is that early morning woman, forgotten her name, who got pissed on air one time but they have kept her on.
I don’t listen enough to know if the Reverend Roger Royle still appears but I had a very bad experience once listening to him. He had been told that some admirer loved his laugh. (Roger’s that is.) Man, Roger was coming out with this excruciating and manufactured cackle all the time. I also detest the slavish propaganda from their Royal Correspondent about the Royal Family. Interestly, some Royal Correspondents have admitted after leaving the job their contempt for those they were paid to ego massage.
I have warmed to James Naughtie, particularly in view of his enthusiasm for classical music.
Thank you for your interest in my comments. I sometimes wonder how many people read what we write compared to those who write post regularly – some of which in their knowledge and mode of expression I look out for and find a pleasure to read. It would be invidious to name names.
July 17th, 2010 at 1:09 pm
Broadsword. The Points of View spoof. Hilarious. Thanks. The contributors, real ones, always seemed to me to be sub Daily Mail types – and that is very sub indeed.