Vatican City, Jun 8, 2017 / 04:14 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- After a last-minute meeting with Pope Francis Thursday to discuss the dire situation of their country, Venezuela’s bishops said they have his full support in facing the trials of a regime they say oppresses its people to maintain power.
“The government has as a goal to maintain power at the cost of the life of any person at all costs,” Archbishop Diego Padrón Sanchez of Cumana told journalists June 8.
Not only this, but the government “has the desire, the will, the scope, to have a submissive, silent people that doesn’t protest,” he said. And to ensure that this happens, society must be made up of a people who have “no food, no medicine (and) which spends every moment trying to resolve daily problems.”
“A people that is oppressed, suffering and sick doesn’t have the strength to raise itself in revolt against anyone,” he said.
Archbishop Padrón spoke to a group of journalists after the leadership of the Venezuelan bishops conference met with Pope Francis and other Vatican officials earlier that morning.
The meeting was not planned in advance, and was not included in the weekly schedule sent out by the Vatican’s Secretariat for Communications. Announced just days before, the conversation was squeezed into the Pope’s agenda before his meeting with the Panamanian bishops, who are in Rome for their ad limina visit, and a meeting with Nigeria’s bishops.
During the meeting, Archbishop Padrón said they discussed the ongoing crisis in the country, and that the conversation was very “cordial, very simple, fraternal” and relaxed. The Pope asked questions, and the bishops were able to answer freely.
The Pope is “very well informed” on the situation, the archbishop said, explaining that Francis himself said he receives a daily update on what is going on.
Francis voiced his closeness to the bishops and the “people who are suffering,” the archbishop said, recalling that Francis was “very moved” by the description of some of the cases they’ve witnessed in recent days.
Venezuela is currently undergoing a humanitarian emergency in which fundamental necessities are inaccessible and many, including children, die due to the lack of basic foods and medicines.
The country has been ruled by a socialist government since 1999. In the wake of Nicolas Maduro succeeding Hugo Chavez as president in 2013, Venezuela has been marred by violence and social and economic upheaval. Poor economic policies, including strict price controls, coupled with high inflation rates, have resulted in a severe lack of basic necessities such as toilet paper, milk, flour, diapers and medicines.
The socialist government is widely blamed for the crisis. Since 2003, price controls on some 160 products, including cooking oil, soap and flour, have meant that while they are affordable, they fly off store shelves only to be resold on the black market at much higher rates.
The Venezuelan government is known to be among the most corrupt in Latin America, and violent crime in the country has spiked since Maduro took office.
The regime is known to have committed gross abuses, including violence, against those who don’t share their political ideologies, and are accused of taking many political prisoners.
Archbishop Padrón said that for the bishops, their “Magna Carta” on how to move forward in the crisis is the letter Vatican Secretary of State Cardinal Pietro Parolin sent them in December, in which he indicated the conditions under which dialogue with the Maduro regime ought to be carried out.
The four conditions listed by Cardinal Parolin are: the assurance of a humanitarian corridor for food and medicine; respect for and the re-establishment of the National Assembly; the release of political prisoners; and the guarantee of elections.
While Venezuelans had been protesting many of Maduro’s moves for some time, the final straw for many was when in late March the president announced his decision to call a constitutional assembly and and to revoke the power of the National Assembly, which had been in the hands of the opposition since 2015.
Part of Maduro’s guarantee was that after the constitutional assembly takes place July 30, elections will finally be held in December.
However, Archbishop Padrón said he doesn’t have faith in the regime, and believes the deal is “a trap” for the people, because during the July assembly “you can easily vote to annul or not the elections in December. So the December date is just an imaginary figure for the people.”
But even though they have very real problems with Maduro, Archbishop Padrón said this doesn’t mean that the bishops are on the side of the opposition.
“We don’t represent any party, and we don’t want to be on the side of the government or the opposition,” he said. “We want to help the people.”
The bishops came “to present to the Holy Father the situation of the Venezuelan people, whether they are those people who are close to the government, or those who feel far from the government. We don’t have any preference in this sense.”
During the meeting, the prelates gave the Pope two dossiers, the first containing a list of some 70 people, mostly youth, who have been killed during protests in Caracas and other cities throughout Venezuela. The second document was a detailed outline of the work the bishops conference has done so far to help alleviate the crisis.
After meeting with the Pope, who gave the bishops his “full support” and “total confidence” in their efforts, the six prelates present for the encounter then met with Cardinal Parolin, who before becoming Secretary of State was the apostolic nuncio to Venezuela for four years.
They later met with officials of the Vatican’s charitable organization Caritas Internationalis, which is offering concrete support to needy families on the ground in Venezuela.
Pope Francis specifically told the bishops to “reinforce” the work that Caritas does, not only for the Venezuela branch, but the international organization as a whole, because they are “ready to help” in acquiring and distributing food and mostly medicines to the people.
However, the bishops conference still faces issues when it comes to getting medicines to the people, Archbishop Padrón said. Even though the government technically gave them permission to distribute medication a few weeks ago, the conditions outlined in the fine print make it nearly impossible to do.
The government does this, he said, because they don’t want to appear “insensitive” or as “a needy country.”
“The international image of the government must be maintained,” he observed.
[…]
What’s with these airplane interviews? Everything was so clear after the Pope snuggled up to Bonino, Pelosi, Biden, Clinton, Soros, Sachs, et al. Now the Pope confuses us again by saying he is against murder. How long Lord?!
Unlike pro-life heroes Popes St. JP II and BXVI, Pope Francis uses the papacy to legitimize worldwide abortion leaders like the Clinton Foundation. That is fraudulent. Who could be surprised since he told us in 2013 that abortion was not a priority of his pontificate, and every action confirms this travesty. If sins below the belt do not matter, why should the pregnancies that result? Why should anyone be impressed when Pope Francis rarely tacks abortion onto his interests? There is no one more poor than the unwanted child in the womb. Abortion and it’s proponents have thrived unchecked everywhere Bergoglio has been a Bishop. He has no credibility on the issue.
“God does not give up if we are late in responding to Him.” The murdered unborn are with God and praying for us.
https://www.reuters.com/article/uk-pope-interview/pope-says-church-must-end-obsession-with-gays-contraception-abortion-idUKBRE98I0S020130919
Yes. How long? You don’t play with life, you just rehabilitate rapists.
Mmm. I’ll be waiting to see how much coverage this presser gets in the so-called mainstream media.
There’s no need to pan the Pope. Especially when the pontiff is willing to stand up for human life and when he is willing to admonish us about the dangers of playing God with human life.
“Whether it is the law not to let the child grow in the mother’s womb or the law of euthanasia in disease and old age,” he said, “I am not saying it is a faith thing, but it is a human thing: there is bad compassion.”
Faith has no bearing? I’m confused
I think the Holy Father is saying that one doesn’t have to be a believer to know that abortion and euthanasia are wrong: the inviolability of human life is defensible according to reason.
He means that you don’t need to believe in God to know that a child in the womb and an elderly person are human beings and that to kill them is to kill a human being. It is a matter of DNA. A being with a human DNA is a human being. Whether you believe in God or in the gods or in no god doesn’t change the fact that you are killing a human being.
As Catholics, we believe that each human being is created in the image of God and has immeasurable value. That is a further step. He is trying to get the first fact across.
Those who support abortion and euthanasia keep trying to get people to believe that it is a matter of religious belief, not a matter of science. If it is a matter of religious belief, then one can believe in it if one wants. If it is a matter of science, then it is an objective fact. But people don’t like objective facts nowadays.
But if there is no God, no after life⁹ no suffering on the cross, why would abortion or euthanasia be wrong? If it was a case of one life over and out then the avoidance of suffering would be critical. Only Faith makes sense and gives purpose.
I believe that the recent president of the pro-life Democrats was an atheist. Is it unthinkable for someone to value human beings because of humanism and a knowledge of science?
I believe the Holy Father was trying to emphasize that killing has no place regardless of one’s religion (or no religion). This perspective is pretty consistent with his views on the death penalty and war.
Actually, it is not. He has never been consistent about anything, including life issues. A blanket condemnation of war and capital punishment is not pro-life. Moral applications of both save lives. And Francis has been soft on abortion in the past through his actions. His beliefs often appear to shift with his mood of the moment. A few years ago, after speaking out against euthanasia, he hastily added, “But the moral law must not be applied mechanically.” I’m glad he is mostly right on this occasion for a change even though there is a slight inference that euthanasia is more wrong now because of better management of pain, which is a falsehood. He still has trouble understanding that truth is eternal. It never changes. Still, maybe he is finally discovering some aspects of orthodox Catholic theology.
Yeah, miracles do occur, so yeah, he may discover and accept some aspects of orthodox Catholic theology. It is hoped that miracle will not be too long or late in occurring.
My interpretation would be that one needn’t have faith to condemn abortion and euthanasia. Anyone of good will committed to upholding principles of natural law could see their way to doing so. Faith commands us to obey the natural law. But one can do so without faith as well.
I would think that traditional, orthodox, backwardist Catholics would all – to a person – be very much aware that murdering the unborn and tossing the sick and useless eldering onto a garbage heap was morally offensive. Who was Francis reminding of Church teaching and the natural law? Surely not those he despises.
He was speaking to everyone, Catholics, non-Catholics, non-believers. Please see me previous comment in reply to knowall.
But, he has a habit of ‘running away from God.’ There are documents that have come out of Francis’ Vatican that have little or no mention of Christ. He speaks about evangelizing without proselytizing yet he shies away even from referencing Christ in his promotion of morality. Since when does giving preference to what we know by dint of our reason mean that we should avoid any mention of God? Let’s remember that Francis is not some university professor of philosophy; he is the Vicar of Christ.
We are encouraged by this papal reference to moral absolutes…
While tangential to our Holy Father’s focused message, a larger listing is supplied below. Hopeful, too, his clear message will be included—and broadened—at the end of Synod 2023, when “the leadership” offers its Questions for Reflection heading into Synod 2024 and its recommendations.
About the interim Reflections, here are three suggestions from the back bleachers:
FIRST, that “subsidiarity” will be substantially developed throughout, such that local bishops (within the “hierarchical communion” and as successors of the apostles are reinstated as more than initial “facilitators”). No need for centrally (mis)managed and larded up programs franchised to (pre-Vatican II) bishop administrators.Especially where prudential judgment is a factor, as in all Catholic Social Thought/Teaching.
SECOND, that the Synod members and the leadership, both, will discern clearly, and fully reject wherever the “smoke of Satan” might have ambiguously insinuated itself into the synodal rhetoric and shopping list.
THIRD, that clarity on how synodal engagement in the world fits into (does not replace) the higher mission of the Church—as is concisely clarified in mutually complementary parts of Gaudium et Spes and elsewhere:
Examples: “Earthly progress must be carefully distinguished from the growth of Christ’s kingdom. Nevertheless, to the extent that the former can contribute to the better ordering of human society, it is of vital concern to the kingdom of God” (n. 39, citing Pope Pius XI), but also, yes, “The Christian who neglects his temporal duties neglects his duties toward his neighbor and even God, and jeopardizes his eternal soul” (n. 43).
AND, of course, Veritatis Splendor (nn. 56, 95, 115) which now explicitly incorporates [!] Natural Law and moral absolutes into the permanent Magisterium.
These non-ideological perspectives become greater synodal “concerns” as we seem to be drifting away from a world of so-called “progress” and toward one of disintegration, with sins of moral omission—inattention to blindsided and real victims of all kinds, to natural disasters, to invertebrate “tolerance” by uprooted culture, economics, politics and society—and by less-than-steadfast word games, imposed on moral/ecclesial certainties in some parts of the Church itself.
_____________________________________________
NOTE: From the Catechism and the Magisterium (n. 2033-5), those intrinsically evil acts which are immoral under all circumstances and non-negotiable, include: intentional killing of the innocent (nn. 2270, 2273), infanticide (n. 2268), abortion (n. 2273), euthanasia (n. 2277); AND sexual immorality (nn. 2352, 2353, 2356, 2357, 2370, 2380, 2381). And, from the SECOND VATICAN COUNCIL, these significant entries: Gaudium et Spes, n. 27 third paragraph, and n. 79 second paragraph.
On second thought, are the above “recommendations” actually IMPERATIVES? Not to be deferred from 2023 to 2024? What kind of “leadership” cajoles Successors of the Apostles (apostello: “sent”) to have a meeting about a meeting?
The Holy Spirit? Did he do this at Pentecost…”come back next year”? Maybe yes to a phased approach, but what really are the ground rules???
After a solid decade of deliberately – and undeniably – uttering confusing, contradictory and divisive statements, Pope Francis has nevertheless revealed his cunning method of eroding Catholic belief. Pope Francis gushes over his abortionist, homosexualist and pan-en-theist friends and then – after exposing himself as a Globalist cheerleader – he shrewdly says something “Catholic” to neutralize criticism, thereby protecting the platform of the papacy he requires to continue attacking the full and authentic Gospel of Jesus Christ. If Pope Francis truly believes that abortionists are “hitmen”, then why does he honour hitmen with the Order of St. Gregory ? If abortion is murder, then why does Pope Francis call murderers “good Catholics” ? These questions are rhetorical – and the answers are obvious.
Honestly, my first thought was that he was just playing to the crowd. He might believe. He might not. I don’t honestly know for sure.
Bingo. Thank you, Father. It is hard for me to fathom how any believing Catholic can take any statement like this from PF seriously. His actions speak louder than his words.
I thought you are supposed to “hate the sin and love the sinner”. Now you’ve got me totally confused! How are we supposed to talk to sinners?
What does the duplicity of Francis have to do with that admonition of Our Lord considering that the criticisms here are that Francis has a long record of hypocrisy on the matter of abortion and being supportive of the world’s most notorious abortionists rather than “hating their sins”? What you might take into consideration is the deep-rooted inconsistency of Francis, a reality that traditionalists or orthodox or simply conservative Catholics (Catholics who are Catholic) have been agonizingly aware.
Francis slanders faithful, non-ideological Catholics around the world as faithless ideologues, which his warped sociology equates as Americanism, while remaining oblivious to his own devout ideological views of global social management by Davos elitists and his non-religious faith in their syncretistic cult of inevitable progress knowing full well of their imperatives of mandatory abortion policies in pursuit of their secular utopia, which he also affirms with his theology where God changes His mind to accommodate His creation. Thus, his preposterous word for those who do not see God as an idiot as backwardists.
Whatever religious beliefs Francis actually has is a mystery for anyone willing to be honest about the totality of what he has said. But his moral sense has been blowing with the wind for a long time and Catholics are wise to not take impulsive statements too seriously when he might well undermine them a month later before the same global audience. Hailing him as a supreme example means we share the moral evil when he does damage later.
I appreciate CWR’s sidebar of past articles. I just now read “Michigan religious order criticizes the LCWR”, June 14, 2012.
Congratulate me! I’m only 11 years behind!
Belated kudos to the Michigan sisters.
At this stage of his game, I don’t give a whit what he believes, thinks, or claims to receive from his ‘holy’ spirit. I’ve given the pope up and over to God. Is there any reason why we need attend to words coming from forked tongues?
Thank you to those who clarified my “faith” quandary. It is difficult to reach those who are so obtuse on the future of the human race, but perhaps it will impact some.
To get a correct perspective on Bergoglio’s remarks on life issues Google up:
Actions do indeed speak far louder than words.
How impressed would you be if Confederate president Jefferson Davis had occasionally remarked that racism was wrong. His actions would far outweigh his words, right? So it is with Bergoglio on the life issues.
From womb to tomb, life is sacred and a precious gift.
Amen Papa. Bravo, belle parole da vivere.
Amen Papa!
These comments underscore the major problem of this papacy — it’s not when he’s clear like this, it’s when he’s ambiguous that’s the problem.
I’m sure the crowd he hangs out with doesn’t help him in these matters.
“I am not saying it is a faith thing, but it is a human thing: there is bad compassion.” . . . by defining the argument to be a non-spiritual “thing”, pardon me for thinking so, but doesn’t he just undermine his own authority to speak on the matter? I am not looking for excuses for the man, but I am also not looking at him through what years of disappointment have wrought.
One of Pope Francis’ cunning tactics is to speak truth and falsehood on alternate days, thereby dividing the Catholic faithful, pitting them against each other, arguing over what they think he may have said – instead of forming a unified phalanx that could effectively battle against his Anti-gospel.
You don’t play with life.
I will pray for you under obligation and out of love. God will hear my prayer.
Sinner that I am, you can not tell me or anyone else better than I or worse than I, to “Let’s go to the peripheries”, when it is leading them to co-operate with purveyors of abortion and contraception.
You can not. You shall not. The Lord will not have you change subjects like that let alone with so many whimsies attending and ignoring the one who speaks to you in His Name.