Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Mexico’s Catholic Church threatens war

Timothy Kincaid

August 20th, 2010

You can’t always trust what you read on the often-nutty Catholic news source LifeSiteNews, but considering the wackadoodle craziness we’ve been hearing from the Catholic hierarchy in Mexico lately, it’s hard to put anything beyond them.

As we told you, Cardinal Juan Sandoval Iniguez of Guadalajara accused the mayor of Mexico City of bribing the nation’s Supreme Court to find that Mexico City’s marriage equality law did not violate the constitution. And he says he has proof.

Mayor Marcelo Ebrard filed a defamation suit against Iniguez. And it is in that context that LifeSiteNews tells us:

The spokesman for the Archdiocese of Mexico City, Hugo Valdemar, is coming out swinging against the socialist political establishment, which is threatening him, the city’s cardinal archbishop and the cardinal archbishop of Guadalajara, with punitive measures following comments condemning the city’s new pro-abortion and gay “marriage” legislation.

Denouncing the “new religious persecution” begun by Mexico City Chief of Government Marcelo Ebrard, which is motivated by “intolerance, hatred, and viscerality,” Valdemar warned that the actions of the mayor could “unleash a war in the country.”

If, indeed, the Church is declaring Holy War on the government, then this is actually becoming serious.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

John in the Bay Area
August 20th, 2010 | LINK

I guess the Church hasn’t noticed the war that is already going on in their country, on their streets, taking the lives of many of their fellow citizens.

So, they are calling for more violence in a country already racked by epidemic violence?

B John
August 20th, 2010 | LINK

The Mayor is doing exactly the right thing by taking them to court. I’ve started to wonder why a group of gay people couldn’t take some of the politicians to court for slander for some of the things they say.

Orrin Hatch said that “gay people don’t tithe, their religion is politics.” It’s not true about me, and it harms me in my community, so why can’t I sue him for slander?

I am seriously trying research the possibility.

Lindoro Almaviva
August 20th, 2010 | LINK

Queen please. War? If that was the case:

1. anyone know how is the church going to defend itself? After all, they do not have an army.

2. What is going to happen after the state gives them a pounding that will be remembered for the next 100 years?

Apparently there are some elements on the church that think that they still have the temporal powers the church enjoyed 500 years ago.

If i was the President, I would tell them all “Bring it on, and be prepared for the consequences.”

I am going to quote Pat Robertson here: If they are claiming that we are after them, then we might just go ahead and do it; so they KNOW without a shadow of a doubt, how it looks and what it feels like. That way all these bitching, complaining and grand standing will end once and for all.

Stephen
August 20th, 2010 | LINK

Strip them of their assets if they don’t keep to the law.

Ben in Oakland
August 20th, 2010 | LINK

Does he really think that the country, declining to truly go to war against the drug cartels that are truly destroying it, is suddenly going to get up in arms?

And do…what?

Over two guys marrying each other.

It will be ineresting to see how this plays out. I’d love to hear the motive for a politician to bribe the supreme court.

I truly hope that the church has over-reached itself on this one. I’m hoping that there will be popcorn.

L. Junius Brutus
August 21st, 2010 | LINK

No, they just wan to inflict as much political damage as possible on the mayor. Just look at the article. No mention of bribery. They are compounding their lie about bribery by claiming that the libel proceedings are actually “religious persecution” and that they are really about the comments they made about marriage and abortion.

Russ
August 21st, 2010 | LINK

So the cardinal mouthed off. The mayor would have done well to just blow it off and let the gays celebrate their new equality, and let the news sink in gently with the straight community.

Of course I don’t know – and I suspect the writer of this article doesn’t know either – all the behind-the-scenes talk and the history of the relationship of church and government down there.

But from this distance it sounds like a schoolyard brawl that is totally unnecessary and will do nobody any good whatsoever.

“Mom! He called me a dirty name!”

Ya know, guys?

John Graykoski
August 21st, 2010 | LINK

Interesting indeed…
After the Mexican revolution, the Church was strictly repressed, priests and nuns were not allowed to wear clerical garb in public. This was because the Church, as it frequently does in history, stood with the powerful, the rich. Clearly, the Roman Church yearns for the old days of priviledge when they stood at the right hand of the King.
The efforts of John Paul and now Benedict to return to a Church controlled by a few secretive men has been largely successful. And sadly, unless the Holy Spirit can conjure up a tornadic wind of change, the placement of bishops throughout the world who support this mindset will ensure the doctrinaire alighnment of the Church with the rich and powerful of the world for many years. This of course means enforcement of rigid “morality” at the sake of justice.

John Doucette
August 21st, 2010 | LINK

Hey, the bishop started this, not the mayor. All the mayor did was respond.
Also, what is Rome doing about this? Isn’t Rome supposed to be in charge of its bishops?

Aconite
August 21st, 2010 | LINK

During the Middle Ages, countries that got into pissing matches with the Church could find themselves under interdict. No sacraments were performed–NONE–in such countries. No baptisms, no confessions, no last rites, no marriages. No exceptions. The strategy was to scare the population with threats of hellfire and damnation (since the Church and its sacraments stood between you and hell, and without them…) until one way or another–political pressure, civil war, what have you–the countries’ leaders bowed to the Church.

The Church is an institution very, very slow to change.

darkmoonman
August 21st, 2010 | LINK

It’s past time to strip churches of their special status.

TampaZeke
August 21st, 2010 | LINK

Too bad the drug cartel nightmare that’s reeking havoc across the country hasn’t drawn as much passion or concern from the unholy Roman empirialists.

Terry
August 21st, 2010 | LINK

In regards to war, it wouldn’t be the first time that the catholic church waged war against Mexico and all the other countries south of the border littering each town with a cathedral right in the middle so all could remember the hate, murder and abuse they brought while attempting to remove any sign of a previous culture or people in the name of God.

Lynn David
August 21st, 2010 | LINK

But not caring enough to go to war over the drug trade in Mexico…. maybe the Catholic Church in Mexico is trading in narcotics?

ebohlman
August 21st, 2010 | LINK

Sandoval is really starting to remind me of Orly Taitz. Maybe they can team up.

MauraHennessey
August 22nd, 2010 | LINK

In 1921, the Catholic Church did declare war upon the Mexican government and incited a multiple years long uprising that killed tens of thousands.

Some Catholic writers have compared the Alcalde of Mexico City with Franco and Pinochet; odd given that the Church supported the bloody uprisings against democratically elected governments that swept these mass murderers into power.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.