OVO

David Willey, Pope treads carefully on Czech visit:

This was Benedict’s second visit to the dominions of the former Austro-Hungarian empire. His first was to Austria two years ago, where he found a strongly critical and somewhat apathetic Catholic flock. In order not to antagonise his Czech hosts the Pope deliberately chose not to mention some common contentious issues of Catholic teaching such as that on abortion, or same-sex marriages, or the problems of dealing with paedophile priests and compensating their victims, which have dominated his visits to other parts of the world. [...] Cardinal Miloslav Vlk, the head of the local Catholic church – who is due to retire shortly – went on national television during the Pope’s stay to lament that in the two decades he has been in office since the fall of Communism, he has achieved practically nothing – neither compensation from the state for seized Church property, nor a proper treaty regulating relations with the Vatican. He blamed local politics. During Benedict XVI’s visit the Pope’s number two, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, the Vatican secretary of state, told Cardinal Vlk not to push the Czech state authorities too hard for money at a moment of huge economic difficulties in the countries of Central and Eastern Europe. This was certainly welcome news for the Pope’s hosts, but rather disappointing for the Czech bishops.

What sort of ‘treaty regulating relations with the Vatican’ and ‘money’ might Cardinal Vlk have been pining for?  Perhaps something like what was achieved recently in Brazil?

The Freethinker, What have become of promised plans to discuss Brazil’s ’secret’ Vatican concordat?:

The Concordat story began, according to Fraser, with the announcement in last November that Brazil’s President Luiz (”Lula”) da Silva would be stopping by the Vatican “on the way to Washington”. However, this turned out to be more than a courtesy call. Once there, the President was ushered into the Vatican’s “Treaty Room” where he signed a concordat. The Brazilian Government at first dismissed it as an “administrative agreement”. In the words of a Brazilian editor “There were hugs, there were blessings, there were pictures – but no statement on what was dealt with between the President and the Pontiff.” Critics note that this agreement appears to be a wedge which finds pretexts to introduce a number of basic legal principles that undermine the secular state. The concordat imports foreign law into Brazil by stipulating that Canon (or Church) Law be used in Catholic institutions. Because this includes Church-run social services, concordats act to impose Canon Law on both their lay employees and their clients. In Germany this is a widespread problem, particularly acute for anyone, like gays or the divorced, whose private life does not accord with Canon Law. The concordat also acts as a foot in the door to proselytise children in state schools. In Poland it only took twenty years for the establishment of voluntary unpaid catechism in state schools to be transformed bit by bit into lessons in Catholic doctrine which, in much of the country, has become effectively compulsory, is now paid for by the state and even counts in the grade average. The agreement commits Brazil to huge payments to the Vatican. It obligates the Brazilian taxpayer to subsidise Church schools, to underwrite Catholic charities and to maintain Church buildings. At the same time it grants the Catholic Church unspecified tax immunity and even certain exemptions from Brazilian labour laws which could be expanded. In Germany the Church maintains quite explicitly that under God’s roof there is no fundamental contradiction between the interests of the employer and employees. Therefore there are virtually no wage agreements with unions, and, of course, no right to strike. The Brazilian concordat ends with the infamous clause that any differences regarding it “are to be settled by direct diplomatic negotiations”. This sounds innocent, but it is not. It means that there’s no appeal to the Constitution and no redress through Brazilian courts. Brazil would have to negotiate with the Vatican and seek its agreement.

Brazil does not have a State religion and so it would seem questionable that Brazil could sign a concordat with a single religion.  But hey presto!  The concordat wasn’t signed by the Roman Catholic Church, it was signed by the Holy See.  The Holy See is a sovereign nation that just happens by total random coincidence to be run by the Roman Catholic Church.  So what if the Bishop of Rome of the Holy See is also the Pope of the the Roman Catholic Church?  It hardly matters that the Pope is the legislative, executive and judiciary of the Holy See and the only absolute monarch in Europe.

The Holy See aka the Roman Catholic Church has a storied history of condordants.  It was from the Roman Catholics that the Spanish fascists borrowed their symbol, who then forcibly removed 30,000 Spanish children from their parents and gave them to childless pro-Franco couples or put them in Catholic Church-run institutions.  And don’t forget the extra-special relationship between the Holy See and Germany 1933-1945.  Don’t forget it, because the Holy See wants you to forget it.  I’m not saying that Brazil or the Czechs are fascists.  I’m just saying that the Holy See is eager to make relations with any nation that will give them money.  When it’s convenient, they’re a religion.  When it’s expedient, they’re a nation.  Handy for hiding decades-old child abuse rings authorized and organized by the Pope, eh?

Christianity bugs me.