Questions about the concordat
Many of the innocent-sounding phrases in the latest Brazilian concordat have, when implemented, caused problems in other countries, including Italy, Germany, Slovakia, Poland and Hungary, the Dominican Republic and Malta.
This concordat can be used to muzzle free speech
Article 2 guarantees “the public exercise of [Church] activities”, yet Article 7 prohibits showing any “disrespect” for them. The Church is allowed to bring its activities outside the circle of the faithful and into the public square, yet brooks no criticism by civil society in that square. Italy also has a treaty, made by Mussolini with the Vatican, which stifles free speech. Last year, under this treaty, an Italian comedienne found herself facing the possibility of five years in prison for “offending the honour of the sacred and inviolable person” of Benedict XVI.
It imposes foreign law on Brazil
Article 3 introduces the Vatican's Canon (Church) Law into Brazil. There is the caveat that this mustn't conflict with Brazilian law and the Constitution. However, this puts the onus on Brazilians to prove that some regulation of Canon Law goes against Brazilian legal system. The concordat stipulates only that Canon Law be used in Catholic institutions, but because this includes Church-run social services, Church law can be effectively imposed 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.
Brazil pays, the Church decides
Article 5 puts Church social service organisations in a position of legal and therefore financial parity with state-run social services. In other words, the Brazilian taxpayer is expected to subsidise these Church-run social services. In Slovakia, this has meant no family planning services in Catholic hospitals. In March 2009 Brazilians saw what this could mean, when the Church tried to prevent the abortion judged by doctors as necessary to save the life of a tiny nine-year-old rape victim carrying twins.
Poor Brazilians must pay for Church opulence
Article 6 obliges the state to “continue to cooperate to protect, value and promote” Church property. However, calling it “cultural heritage” doesn't alter the fact that the state is to pay for the conservation and maintenance of Catholic places of worship: to repair the roof and fix the plumbing. The Church is extremely wealthy and well able to afford to keep up its own property. People in the favelas could well use that money to repair their own houses.
The concordat lets Catechism into state schools
Article 11 permits Catholic religion to be taught to children as “a regular discipline in normal hours of state schools in primary education”. That's the way it started in Poland, as well, twenty years ago. A Polish bishop has admitted that the first step was to get catechism into state schools and taught on a voluntary basis, next to have it funded by the taxpayer and then to make it count on the grade average. Now a further step has been announced. Beginning in autumn 2009 for many students, even non-Catholics, catechism will, in practice, be compulsory.
First steps towards “concordat marriage”?
Article 12 even appears to lay the groundwork for the eventual introduction of “concordat marriage”, that is to say, marriage according to Canon (Church) Law, with no possibility of divorce. This was ensured by the concordats of Mussolini's Italy and Franco's Spain, and even by the concordats in force today in the Dominican Republic (Article 16) and Malta (which has a whole concordat concerning marriage). According to the Brazilian concordat, “Brazilian legislation concerning the acceptance of foreign judgments” is to apply, not to foreign criminals, but to Brazilians who have married within their own country! This opens the door to enforcing the rulings of the Apostolic Signature, the Vatican's “marriage court” of last instance, which, of course, follows Canon Law. But why should Brazilian citizens let their marriages be governed by the laws of a foreign country?
And certainly not by a country whose courts have been found wanting. In 2001 the European Court of Human Rights ruled that the procedures of the Rota Romana, the ecclesiastical appeals court responsible for marriage-annulment applications, failed to reach the standards required for a fair trial. Why should Brazilian citizens be subject to foreign courts that do not follow the modern standards of evidence demanded in Brazil?
Church tax immunity will rob the Brazilian treasury
Two for one?
Article 20 states that the latest concordat is to be “established under” the previous concordat — the earlier one for the military that was never ratified by Congress. This appears to be an attempt to quietly bring in two concordats at once. This is important, as the cautious military concordat contained the possibility of being cancelled, while Article 19 of the latest one makes this virtually impossible. It requires that any differences regarding the concordat “are to be settled by direct diplomatic negotiations”. However, that means 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. One country actually tried this. In 2006 a Hungarian cabinet minister went to the Vatican to try to renegotiate the Finance Concordat. He found that no one had time to talk to him. Concordats are for keeps.








