In the year preceding the elections, the government will see its challenges of dialogue with religious deepen. If you put it on an ax from Shango next to the crucifix, the Christian reaction will be immense. If you refuse the request made by the Institute of Defense of the Rights of Afro-Brazilian Religions (Idafro), will shake your alliance with minority groups that claim protection.
In November last year, the Supreme Court decided that the presence of religious symbols of Catholicism does not hurt secularism, considering them historical-cultural manifestations. Now the Idafro claims the possibility opened by the decision and asks an ax from Xangô to be inserted into the Supreme.
This will happen less that the minister uses different analysis criteria and deny the historical and cultural contribution of Afro-Brazilian religions.
Idafro’s request already finds back in the reality of Brazilian courts. Last December 19, the Rio de Janeiro Court of Justice received and began to leave, in its building ,. The event had judges, members of the CNJ and the, linked to the Ministry of Culture.
When the STF’s decision occurred last November, which was time for the walls of Brazilian public institutions to be emptied of religious symbols.
The Supreme Court decided to keep the crucifixes, and the posture of ministers echoes the difficulty of the Lula administration in sailing in the religious field. It oscillates between progressive nods and fear of displeasing conservative sectors.
Two of the votes to keep the crucifixes in the courts were from ministers nominated by Lula recently to the Supreme Court. But despite being new names, the justifications they presented seem to exit the first half of the 20th century, when more than 90% of the Brazilian population declared themselves Catholics.
These two ministers are practicing Catholics. , for example, he argued that the Jesuit presence since the episode of the arrival of the Portuguese to Brazil demonstrates the relevance of the Catholic Church in the “educational and moral formation of the people that arose”. It was in the same direction and justified the maintenance of the crucifix by the “historical influence of Christianity and, in particular, the Catholic Church” in the country.
It is clear from the vows of the ministers that their goal was to judge whether or not to maintain crucifixes. However, in the text of the final decision, the Supreme Court mentions “religious symbols” in the plural. Now the court will be and urged to position itself on which religious symbols are actually authorized.
The Supreme Court will face this issue at Lula’s worst moment in the presidency. , more than 40% of the population disapprove of their government. In all groups of the population, including those that guaranteed their election in 2022 – women, blacks and browns, and northeastern -, approval plummeted.
. Catholics, who have always approved the Lula government more than evangelicals, are less optimistic. And evangelicals worsened their assessment of the government. Lula cannot achieve the attention of Christian voters.
And now the Supreme Court, which has chosen a reference to the Jesuits to deliberate on the 21st century country’s religious symbols, has created a crisis whose solution will expand government problems with religious.
It remains to be known who will be more contradicted: Christians, seeing an ax of Shango next to the crucifix, or the Afro-religious, listening to the ministers that their faith has no historical and cultural weight. What is certain is that Lula, who has had difficulties in 2022 to deal with the religious electorate, will reach 2026 even worse.
