Posted on 09/25/2004 7:38:56 AM PDT by JesseJane
The Spanish appeasement government of Zapatero is now planning to drastically cut ties with the Roman Catholic Church, slashing current funding in half: Funding for Church to be slashed by Spanish. (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/09/25/wspain25.xml&sSheet=/news/2004/09/25/ixworld.html)
The Spanish government sparked a furious row yesterday after it emerged that it had drawn up a timetable to halve state funding of the Roman Catholic Church and to ban crucifixes from public buildings.
The Socialist government has already pedged to confront the Church ideologically and fiscally and to transform Spain into a fully secular society by scrapping the Church’s “privileged position in society”.
The newspaper El Mundo reported yesterday that the government has now drawn up a timetable to break the bonds, removing any lingering hopes that it might reach an accommodation.
The government plans to put an end to the arrangement whereby Spaniards can offer a percentage of their taxes to the Church. This arrangement contributes £54 million a year to Church funds.
This might be defensible as a move toward US-style separation of church and state—except that Zapatero is simultaneously planning to vastly increase state funding for Islam:
Further enraging conservatives, the government has drawn up plans to finance the teaching of Islam in state-run schools and to give funds to mosques on the grounds that it will create greater understanding of the country’s one million Muslims.
Although Spain has been a Catholic country since the expulsion of the Moors in 1492 is has also long had a tradition of anti-clericalism that flared violently during the civil war. The old saying was that “a Spaniard is always behind a priest, either with a candle or a stake.”
The Zapateristas seem intent on systematically dismantling Spanish society.
The idiotic, cowardly population of Spain disgusts me. They deserve what they've elected, and therefore what follows. Having metaphorically kissed the arse of the Muslim hordes, the favor will soon be returned in form of the beheading or forced conversion of their entire remaining pathetic Christian population.
Like Britain, Spain is a constitutional monarchy, so they don't have a President. Zapatero is Prime Minister. If parliament gave him a vote of no confidence today, there'd be another election soon.
Zapatero only won by five percent in the popular vote and 16 seats in the legislature. There are plenty of minor parties, so it's possible that if one or more of them turned against him, or if a major chunk of Zapatero's own party became disaffected with his course of action, his government could fall.
But usually it takes more than ideological disagreement to topple a ruling coalition -- all the more so, since some of the parties in parliament are actually to the left of the Socialists, and support their policies, and since party discipline is greater in Europe than here.
Generalissimo Franco, call home!
I hope this sparks a violent backlash whereby Mass attendance soars.
I agree, historically the persecuted church has done much better. Read Rev. 2:8-11. The (persecuted) church of Smyrna is the only one that our Lord did not hold anything against!
And what would Muslims be doing in a Catholic Church (read infidel meeting place)? Fer crying out loud, we don't go around telling them how to practice their faith or create art. This reminds me of the fresco in a basilica in Milan that depicts Mohammed in hell. Muslims asked for the painting to be removed or changed. They apparently didn't notice that popes and priests were also depicted in hell. It was not a sectarian specific damnation.
Kerry=Zapatero
In July, the Church struck back, springing an ambush on Mr. Zapatero when he accompanied King Juan Carlos to the annual national offering at the Cathedral of Santiago de Compostela. With 52 clergymen looking on, the Archbishop of Santiago, Julian Barrio, let loose a withering denunciation, accusing Mr Zapatero of perverting the natural order.He declared that marriage was "essentially heterosexual" and that the Church had every right to interfere in national politics "in cases of people's fundamental rights, or the salvation of souls."
The federal government in Germany attempted to ban crucifixes in schoolrooms in Bavaria, but the Bavarians refused. We'll see if the Spanish are as Catholic.
Not to sound too hopeful, but the King of Spain has as much constitutional power as Generalissimo Franco did. In other words, it's not a purely ceremonial office. Often on state occasions, a major address to be given by a high-ranking clergyman would have to be cleared by the King, if not in person then certainly by His Majesty's master of ceremonies and protocol. So, I'd say there is a pretty good chance that there is profound disagreement with Zapatero's agenda "at the highest levels."
He may be digging his own political grave. Now is not a really good time to support a dilution of Spanish national culture.
As to your question about Zapatistas. I believe you are correct. The Zapatistas in Spain are an importation from the revolutionaires in Mexico. The Communist party is pretty much represented by the Zapatistas
Funny how you interpret my Catholic remark as negative. I am a Catholic, a practicing one, in fact.
I stand by my remark.
In my opinion, and it is only my opinion, the Church has always done better as an underdog. When they aren't, they are considered to be the oppressing fat cats, all white Euro-male bastion of sexism, racism, wealth and elitism...with the standard photos of the red hats and scandal sheets.
The Church survived the multi-pope era, the Reformation and the Medicis.
But, the DO do better when perceived as "underdogs." They are the LEFT, the liberal spiritual left of the political spectrum. They are ALWAYS attacked by their own party. They are always denigrated, excoriated by the political lefties. The ACLU ALWAYS tries to make them disappear, but the Church still hangs in there with the "love thy neighbor" routine. It's great. My money is on the Church. After all, ITS founder was God as God's Son, Jesus.
As for the Zapatistas, they are still going strong in Mexico, in Chiapas, trying to get that poor, god-forsaken state independent of Mexico. How stupid is that?
Oh well. Zapata WAS killed during the Mexican Revolution. So much for his efforts. The Zapatistas won't succeed in Spain either if they follow their standard path of estupideza.
If I may, I don't think this was intended as bias, but as truth.
The early church writings are quite clear in their idea that persecution brought faith, and the evidence of faith led to the conversion of many souls.
The Christian Faith in Europe needs a jump-start: this may do it.
Thank you.
Well put.
You said it better than I did.
>>The Zapatistas are named after Zapata. Is that the same Emiliano Zapata from Mexican history? Senor Revolution?
First it is ZapatERistas, not Zapatistas. The Zapateristas are named after the Prime Minister, Zapatero. It has nothing to do with the Mexican Revolution.
"Christendom's third holiest site"... somehow funny, that. The seemingly natural use of the word Christendom struck me as unintentionally fatidic, in that it unwittingly described the true cultural struggle. Also, the "third holiest" is a qualification I've only ever seen used in relation to Moslem places.
Well, this may seem like a reversal of our usual roles, since you're generally more pessimistic and I'm generally more favorably inclined towards contemporary royals, but to be perfectly honest I wouldn't count on King Juan Carlos, who is widely respected (even by republicans) for swiftly and voluntarily surrendering his powers in order to "democratize" Spain after Franco's death, to resist Zapatero's agenda, even if he did approve of that cleric's address.
For one thing, I'm not sure how devout a Catholic he is. King Baudouin of the Belgians temporarily abdicated for 24 hours rather than sign his name to the bill legalizing abortion in Belgium in 1990. But King Juan Carlos has never made even such a symbolic gesture. When Spain legalized abortion, Catholic writer Frederick Wilhelmsen wrote wistfully, "If Juan Carlos had defied the government and the constitution by calling in the Armed Forces to back him, what would have happened? ... Don Juan Carlos would have appeared before the entire Christian world as a Catholic king and knight whose sword was at the service of the unborn." Needless to say, no such dramatic action was forthcoming.
King Juan Carlos has been a popular, dutiful, dignified, and effective constitutional monarch, and I respect him for that. But I see no sign that he has any desire to be anything more.
French and German leaders rush to back the EU Constitution in SpainSpain is the first of ten countries in the EU to ratify the treaty by popular vote, which will be held on Sunday, 20 February... Both the ruling Socialists (PSOE) and opposition People’s Party (PP) support the document, and the polls show that a clear majority of 40 percent is likely to vote in favour, with a mere seven percent opposed. However, there remains a large group of floating voters and 90 percent of Spaniards are said to know nothing or very little about the Constitution... Zapatero has spent about 7.5 million euro on the government’s campaign, dubbed, "The First with Europe".
by Lucia Kubosova
2-11-2005
FR Lexicon·Posting Guidelines·Excerpt, or Link only?·Ultimate Sidebar Management·Headlines
Donate Here By Secure Server·Eating our own -- Time to make a new start in Free Republic
PDF to HTML translation·Translation page·Wayback Machine·My Links·FreeMail Me
Gods, Graves, Glyphs topic·and group·Books, Magazines, Movies, Music
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.