The following comes from a May 22 story on the America magazine website. It is one of four items posted today on CalCatholic, labeled A, B, C and D. When read in order, the items show how the story developed, ending in part D — Bishop Blaire’s “clarification” two days after his original remarks were published.

The Archdiocese of Washington today joined a rush of Catholic lawsuits around the country this week challenging the Department of Health and Human Services mandate on the inclusion of contraception in health care plans beginning August 2013.

In California, however, Bishop Stephen E. Blaire of the Diocese of Stockton expressed some guarded concerns about the opening of this latest front in the U.S. bishops’ continuing religious liberty campaign. Bishop Blaire is chairman of the U.S. bishops’ Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development and a member of the U.S.C.C.B. Administrative Committee which approved the “Fortnight of Freedom” campaign.

“The bishops that I am in contact with in California are strong supporters of the importance of defending and strengthening religious liberty in our country,” Bishop Blaire said. “I do think there are probably some different concerns with how it is being done,” he added.

According to Bishop Blaire, attorneys for California dioceses “did have some concerns with this strategy,” expressed a desire for more consultation and worried about possible legislative and judicial repercussions because of it in California. He explained that California dioceses had already gone unsuccessfully down the judicial path in challenging government mandates on contraception and insurance coverage.

The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops is not a party to the lawsuits. Several were filed initially by the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, and the most recent suits have been brought on behalf of 44, so far, Catholic dioceses, universities and other entities in 12 different federal jurisdictions in coordination with pro bono attorneys from the law firm of Jones Day.

Bishops Blaire acknowledged that “there is a concern among some bishops that there ought to have been more of a wider consultation” regarding overall strategy on the religious liberty question. “And I say that with some hesitation,” he added, “because the California bishops very strongly support whatever action has to be taken to promote religious liberty.

“The question is what is our focus as bishops and that we have opportunity to clarify our focus and that we are all in agreement on focus.” He said some bishops appear to be speaking exclusively on the mandate itself “that it is imposed … as a violation of [individual] conscience.”

He said there are other bishops who see the crucial question as the religious liberty of the church itself and its freedom “to exercise her mission through her institutions.” He added, “I think that it’s important that there be a broader discussion of these issues [at the June U.S. bishops meeting in Atlanta]” so that U.S. bishops can clarify their message “and not allow it to be co-opted.”

Bishop Blaire explained he was worried that some national groups appear to be seizing on the issue and transforming the dispute over religious liberty into a political fight.
“I am concerned that in addressing the H.H.S. mandate,” he said, “that it be clear that what we are dealing with is a matter of religious liberty and the intrusion of government into the church and that it not be perceived as a woman’s issue or a contraceptive issue.
“I think there are different groups that are trying to co-opt this and make it into political issue, and that’s why we need to have a deeper discussion as bishops.”

Bishop Blaire believes discussions with the Obama administration toward a resolution of the dispute could be fruitful even as alternative remedies are explored. He worried that some groups “very far to the right” are trying to use the conflict as “an anti-Obama campaign.”

“I think our rhetoric has to be that of bishops of the church who are seeking to be faithful to the Gospel, that our one concern is that we make sure the church is free to carry out her mission as given to her by Christ, and that remains our focus.” If the bishops can maintain that focus, he said, “the people rally behind us,” but the bishops lose their support when the conflict is seen as too political.

Bishop Blaire said the upcoming meeting in Atlanta should offer an opportunity for a “thorough and careful discussion” about focus in the religious liberty campaign and Catholic “principles of cooperation that need to be applied in any kind of accommodation.”

For original story Click here.



Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 12:13 AM By Abeca Christian
We should be concerned with what God thinks more, who cares if people think that our church is Anti Obama, the church already seems pro-Obama by the way Catholics voted for him, so to rebuttal that, we need to be more Anti Obama! Obama has declared war on the church with it’s policies, so we should see the truth, it is Obama who is Anti-faith, Anti-Christian. Not the other way around!

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 12:51 AM By Central Valley
Blaire is a shining example of the failure of bishops. “Anti-Obama”? Every Catholic should be anti-Obama as he is the most pro-culture of death president the country has ever seen. Everything those of us in the pews warned about four years ago is here and now thanks to Obama and his ilk. The bishops should be ashamed of themselves. Again, it is the faithful that will save the church. We in the pews refuse to surrender as our “sheperds” have. “The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops.” ~ St. Athanasius.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 3:05 AM By Fillmore
Here we go, the old divide and conquer. Why speak out like this and particularly to a non-Catholic rag like America?

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 4:59 AM By Juergensen
Bishop Blaire “expressed a desire for more consultation” ~ You mean like the “consultation” the bishops have been having with abortionist and homosexualist “Catholic” politicians for the past 40 years? That’s certainly borne fruit, hasn’t it, Your Excellency?

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 6:01 AM By OSCAR
And who does Bishop Blaire think is pulling the political strings in DC? If he believes it is not OBAMA for the Obama Administration – who does he think it is? Does he want California Catholics to continue voting for a poltician who supports abortion, gay marriage, not paying national debts, class warfare, appointing bad judges, violating the Constitution (law) etc ? ? ? The Gospel is against all of these things. Please wake up Bishop Blaire before you criticize others. The Catholics in your Diocese need to learn that they may not vote for politicians who support immoral actions. When are you going to teach them the TRUTH of the GOSPEL?

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 6:11 AM By Dan
Bishop Blaire, Obama has succesfully surrounded himself with dissident/faux Catholics for the express purpose of nuturing Catholic opposition to his policiies. Which is to say Obama himself has made it a political fight, one which he is counting on winning precisely by making it a women’s issue or a contraceptive issue. He has so far outmanuevered the bishops and the June meeting ought to be a frank acknowledgement of this. If the focus of this meeting is on cooperation and accommodation with Obama, Obama’s victory over the Church will be complete. It’s a smaller scale Henry VIII all over again, but without the bloodshed and dispoiling of the monasteries.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 6:26 AM By Gary
If you are not ANTI-Obama, you are PRO-Obama. Either this Bishops supports Obama’s actions or does not. There is nothing in between regarding abortion, homosexual acts, not paying debts, instigating Class Warfare, and violating the US Constitution. What does not Bishop not understand?

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 6:29 AM By Robert Lockwood
Bishop Blaire should wake up to the fact that the entire Obama administration is ANTI CATHOLIC, and, ANTI CHRISTIAN period. It has nothing whatsoever to do with being “far right” or left or anything else. Mr. Obama is out to change this country in every aspect, is doing so without regard to the our religious, moral, or political basis. Since Mr.Obama is operating in the political arena with his anti Christian policies then he needs to be fought in that arena by all thinking people, including Bishop Blaire. The reason we have abortion, partial birth abortion, and all the other anti life procedures today is because our Bishops sat on their hands when they had the chance to take a stand and profess our faith in Christ and did nothing. Bishop Blaire wants to continue that policy.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 7:24 AM By Bud 
Thanks Bishop Blaire for absolutely nothing. Just what is your focus as a bishop? You are making a case with semantics as your excuse! Why isn’t this a political thing when the one who is responsible for so much of the same continues to use “contraception” with the word abortion glossed over for future use. Our impotent politicians are only second to our and the bishops sitting there like blind men too long!

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 7:35 AM By Chris
So what does Bishop Blaire want to discuss? Abortion, using tax-payer dollars for abortion, supporting homosexual acts in the military, gay-marriage, lack of freedom of religion, spending without consideration for paying debts and getting us further in debt, supporting secularism and relativism – where there is no right and wrong? If the Bishop does not believe that Catholics should VOTE in accord with the Bible and CCC – he needs re-education or retirement Maybe this is why he does not promote the reading of the CCC in his Diocese – so he can promote his own brand of politics.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 8:01 AM By grampsc
With respects, it is not difficult to find a whimpy Bishop in Ca. being politically correct is tres importante when one is mingling with the power elite. Obama has a clear strategy of divide and conquer, it is working to a T as the Bishops self divide. As a certain amount of pandering continues the masses are poorly served by a clergy mentality which seeks somehow to accomodate rather than negotiate.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 8:32 AM By BETTY
What is there to discuss about religious freedom? Either you are for it or against it. What is there to discuss about the sinfulness of abortion, homosexual acts, acting against commutative justice, instigating hatred and covetousness through Class warfare, and on and on. Either you are for these sins or against them. What is there to discuss about Voting for or against Politicans who support these sins? Either you are for their policies or not. Does Blaire understand that as long as each Diocese stays within the teaching of the Church, that he and other CA Bishops have nothing to say about it ? ? ? What does he want to discuss? If Blaire were Faithful to the Gospel every Catholic over age 16 in his Diocese would be told to read the CCC and that all of the above are Sins, and Catholics have an obligation to vote against politicans who support immorality and sinfulness.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 8:56 AM By Life Lady
Our Lord is very clear about tepidity. We have the ability thru the Holy Spirit, to discern what is right from what is wrong. There is no discussion necessary when we call upon those gifts, there is only for or against, right from wrong and nothing in between but tepidity. That flaw (tepidity) is likened to vomit, so, I believe that the good bishop needs to study that so that he is clear about what he should do, and where he should stand. If he does not clear up that beam in his own eye, he will be unable to study the flaw in anyone else.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 9:24 AM By Sandra
We are anti-Obama because he is pro death of the unborn, pro euthanasia of those with disabilities and the elderly, and against marriage between one man and one woman. Not to mention his stripping away of individual freedom and the right to speak out in the public square regarding our religious beliefs.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 9:41 AM By Francis
“We have the ability thru the Holy Spirit, to discern what is right from what is wrong.” It is extremely dangerous for any one person to think that what she hears (or thinks she hears) from the Holy Spirit is what she thinks it is, especially when it contradicts the bishops. No person is safe from the devil’s ego-temptations, which always masquerade as the amost holy thoughts! Since our beginning, our Church has operated, at least in principle, by consensus. That means, “the Magisterium” is the Church’s teaching, though her bishops, as a whole body. No clique of better-than-their-brothers Bishops nor other clerics can impose “Truth” on the rest. We are not individual lone-wolf Christians, “discerning” right from wrong on our own in an echo chamber, proclaiming idiosyncratic “Truth” like the Evangelicals do. As a Church, we listen to our pastors, and our pastors confer with the bishops and the Pope. Surely each of us has enough sins to confess, enough character defects to change, without confessing each others’ or our bishops sins?! In communion we have patience with each other, patience with our pastors and bishops, patience to let God do the wonders He alone can perform with every new day. “Where two or more of you are gathered…” is about all of us being in relation, being patient with ourselves and with each other. God bless all of you, all of us!

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 10:35 AM By Brian S. 
Bishop Blaire’s observation that court challenges on similar grounds have been unsuccessful in the past should not be lost here. Prudent leadership must weigh the cost of failure against the benefit of success and this is the point of Bishop Blaire’s remarks.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 11:17 AM By another Betty
I read statements by Bishops hoping for a clear concise statement and what do I get? A statement that says that we need “more consultation”. “More consultation” is just what we don’t need, thank you very much and it leaves me feeling very disappointed and, yes, very angry. Can’t you do better than that, Your Excellency?

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 11:39 AM By 4unborn
Bishop Blaire, be not afraid!! Holy Spirit, give Bishop Blaire, boldness!!!

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 12:08 PM By an18holer
Lead, follow or get out of the way – Obama attacked the Catholic Church and our constitutional rights. If that’s political then so be it.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 1:15 PM By Delilah 
Of the 5 non-negotiables, abortion, euthanasia, embryonic stem cell research and so called homosexual “marriage” Obama would like to see all 5 lawful. No Catholic with a well formed conscience can vote for him.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 1:27 PM By JMJ
The Bishop is afraid that he will lose $$$$$$$$$.$$ from Washington, D.C. and of course, what was the USCCB doing every election year, when Canon 915 was brought up? Postpone any action on it until AFTER the elections. Bishop Gregory was horrible as a leader and now poor Card. Dolan has all of his mess to fix and with Bishops that lack backbone such as Bishop Blaire, it will be a field day for Obama. I read D and he said NOTHING!!! God have mercy on us. +JMJ+

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 1:41 PM By MAC
Brian S. The Church has only lost in CA Courts (and a few small northeastern states that are as bad as CA). This is because the CA Bishops do not teach Catholics not to vote for bad politicians who support immoral lifestyles. Bad politicians make bad laws and appoint bad judges. When are the CA Bishops going to start teaching that Catholics must not vote for abortion supporting, gay-marriage supporting, covetous and hate supporting class and racial warfare politicians? Until they get their own Diocese fixed, stay away from Faithful Diocese.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 1:44 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
6:11 AM By Dan “It’s a smaller scale Henry VIII all over again, but without the bloodshed and dispoiling of the monasteries.” Dan Henry VIII did not even start doing those things until he met opposition, mostly from the laity, with at first only one Bishop, Cardinal John Fisher. So you should have paraphrased your writing above with “not yet”! Blaire should be sent to a Monastery of Pennance for the rest of his life. God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 1:53 PM By MIKE
Brian S, Bishop Blaire’s observation should be that in his Diocese it is mostly his own fault. If Bishops don’t teach the CCC, then Catholics will not vote appropriately. When Catholics vote for evil politicians, evil judges get appointed and evil laws get passed. It is that simple. This is the issue in CA and a few small northeastern States that are in the same position with their Bishops. Catholic adoption agencies have had to close, the Obama administration took away funding that was used to help victims of sexual slavery since they would not be counseled to kill any babies. What is to talk about other than terrible Catechesis by some US Bishops – many of whom reside in CA based upon voting records at Federal, State and Local levels? Now these same Bishops seem surprised and want to talk. Catholics VOTING Catholic is required – and the Bishops must teach it all the time not just during a crisis.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 1:54 PM By JLS
Brian S., you are correct in so far as Enlightenment philosophy goes; and sadly Bp Blaire and many others go only that far in their path to faith based reasoning. They cannot win on the terms of the world; the only way is to walk on faith. They refuse to do this because they do not know what faith is.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 1:57 PM By JLS
Francis, your rant is fine if it directed towards insane people; but most people are sane and faithful Catholics can work well with inspiration from the Holy Spirit … Jesus gave us the Holy Spirit. Bishops have no control over the Spirit of God and as Catholicism has always taught, God engages individuals regardless of their pomp and circumstance. If you don’t know this, then you know nothing of Catholicism.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 2:00 PM By JLS
“working with the power elite”: One can either be their slave or provide them with the insight of God. But no one can do both. One can have either God or mammon, but not both.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 2:00 PM By Louise
Carl Olson of Catholic Word Report describes Bishop Blaire as naive. Bishop Blaire’s positions are usually “liberal Dem before Catholic”

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 2:06 PM By JOYCE
Bishop Blaire is not capable of leading in the time of crisis – only asking for more discussions with his fellow Bishops, so he can have his personal input in directing them – with his GREAT WISDOM. If they had taught the CCC on an ongoing basis, Catholics would never have elected – Obama, Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstien, or Moonbeam Brown, or the other miriad of State and Local immorals who support Sodomy, Murder of babies, and humongous debtloads that impact family taxation and employment opportunities.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 2:30 PM By John Feeney
Bishop Blaire is obviously luke warm!

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 3:25 PM By Juergensen
Brian: The Supreme Court has NEVER addressed the demonic concept that the federal government can force religious organisations to act contrary to central tenets of their faith. As such, Bishop Blair’s supposed “court challenges” – even if they exist – are inapposite, nonbinding, and irrelevant. They serve only as cover for bishops who want Obama re-elected.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 4:44 PM By OneoftheSheep
To those who repent God permits return, and he encourages those who were losing hope. Return to the Lord and leave sin behind, plead before his face and lessen your offence. Come back to the Most High and turn away from iniquity, and hold in abhorrence all that is foul. Ecclesiasticus 17 : 24-26 Dear children! Today I call you to become my witnesses by living the faith of your fathers. A witness is a martyr. With us?

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 5:11 PM By Dana
The Lutheran Church of Germany was totally taken over by Nazi sympathizers and when Dietrich Bonhoeffer and like-minded pastors broke away in order to carry on the original tenets of the faith, it was the rogue nazi group that was recognized by the rest of the world. It’s really REALLY important to stand united now and not let the press, this current rogue administration or other enemies of the Church make any inroads into Church business. Pray for our bishops. Pray for God’s will to be done. Don’t forget the rally on June 8th. Stay united. WE ARE ONE BODY. Trust in God. Sometimes I think we Catholics have been too Americanized and forget we owe our allegiance to God first, before anything. I’d rather hear Bishop Blair’s view of things and not something second hand from a secular magazine or paper. I wish those of you who are so angry at Bishop Blair would transfer your resentment to the creature who deserves everyones’ censure and condemnation and I hope I live long enough to see him exposed as the imposter he is.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 5:27 PM By Nani
“He worried that some groups “very far to the right” are trying to use the conflict as “an anti-Obama campaign.”” This sentence says it all. Knowing his track record, he really is afraid his “messiah” and political party won’t get reellected. Disgusting how many of our priests, bishops and nuns have sold out the real Messiah! If we want God’s mercy, we better be praying, fasting and making reparation.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 7:33 PM By Francis
While I would agree with JLS that “faithful Catholics can work well with inspiration from the Holy Spirit,” my point is that it is critical before we act to place ourselves in community with our peers, spiritual director and pastor. Acting on inspiration alone, unchecked by community and the Body of Christ, is dangerous and contrary to the CCC, part 3 article I “The Communal Character of the Human Vocation.” Our Bishops, guided by the Holy Spirit, are working through this; our part is to listen and accept their guidance. It is not for us to undercut our pastors’ and bishops’ authority by judging their character and motivations.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 8:45 PM By Brian S. 
Laws made for the general utility may always have wide-ranging impact on religious liberty. One of the first religious cases to the Supreme Court was the Reynolds case, in 1876. In that case, the federal law banning polygamy was upheld against Mormons claiming it was their religious duty. In 1990, the Smith case ruled against two members of the Native American Church and upheld their denial of benefits after they were fired for using peyote as part of their worship service. In that case, Scalia (one of the conservative four many of you are counting on) applied a “reasonable basis” test to uphold the government action, specifically rejecting the more restrictive “compelling interest” test – prompting President Clinton to attempt to codify the “compelling interest” test, largely unsuccessfully. The bottom line is that at no time has the United States treated any and all religious practice as bring outside the rule of law. Pray this lawsuit succeeds, as it needs prayer.

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 8:45 PM By Bea
WWJD–remember these wristbands? We need to follow in HIS FOOTSTEPS. Be in communion with the Saints and we will overcome what I see as religious persecution

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 9:57 PM By Thomas Edward Miles
The Catholic right wing and the right wing republican bishops need to take a long vacation…..allow me to drive you to the train!!!

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 10:42 PM By JLS
Francis, what makes you presume that people are not communal? Do you have some definition in mind of communal that you’d like to try out here?

Posted Monday, May 28, 2012 10:45 PM By JLS
Francis, in case you haven’t noticed, it is not the laity that is undercutting the bishops’ authority, but the bishops themselves who are betraying their calling. Why do you suppose the Pope told the bishops to “become holy”? How do you have an non-holy bishop with valid authority, Francis?

Posted Tuesday, May 29, 2012 7:49 AM By Ted
“Anti-Obama” is an appropriate thing to be if you’re a Christian, especially so for Catholics. Bishop Blair needs to adopt less limp-wristed attitude and rhetoric. It’s OK to be a strong, determined leader – in fact it’s the way all of our bishops should conduct themselves. I’d like to know, what exactly they’re afraid of. It can’t just be the IRS.

Posted Tuesday, May 29, 2012 9:33 AM By Tracy
Thomas Edward Miles, these “right wingers” you talk about (May 28, 9:57 PM) do hope to vacation one day in heaven with their King! By the way, are you saying that you would like “right wingers” to take an earthly vacation, meaning that you look forward to them returning to bother you some more? Or is it that you would rather like them to be taken to the train station of martyrdom? I detect hatred and intolerance in your statements.

Posted Tuesday, May 29, 2012 9:59 AM By OSCAR
Thomas Miles, there are only Catholics, Catholic Heretics and Catholic Schismatics. There is no right or left wing regarding the Catholic Faith / Religion. There is no conservative or liberal/progressive Catholics regarding Faith. The terms you use are false, and spread only by those who are: 1) Catholics guilty of schism or heretical practices, or 2) non-Catholics who don’t know any better and spread lies, or 3) baptized Catholics who have not read their CCC. Please do not continue to spread the lies. Catholics do their best to adhere to all in the CCC, and this is where you will find accurate termminology. Heretics and Schismatics are defined in CCC #2089. Thank you.

Posted Tuesday, May 29, 2012 11:46 AM By Francis
JLS: Three quick answers to your three questions. (1) I’m not “presum[ing] that people are not communal.” I’m noticing that the comments here seem not the least bit supportive of the Bishop’s authority, and don’t seem to comport with the standard of human vocation the CCC calls for. (2) Um, I didn’t notice any bishops commenting on this page, unless incognito. Many comments here are not even superficially charitable. Furthermore, what do *you* know about being a bishop? Don’t you think the bishop himself knows more about his vocation than you do? Why presume to judge his character and motives? (3) It makes no sense to divide the bishops into “holy” and “non-holy.” Bishops are as imprefect as all of us, and becomimg holy is a direction, not a destination. I am confident that even in private the bishops’ comments about each other and about non-bishops are vastly more charitable that what I read on this page. Even the “least holy” among them is further down the road toward holiness than most of us.

Posted Wednesday, May 30, 2012 11:17 AM By JLS
Francis, explain and define “bishop’s authority”. The Pope himself has “divided bishops into holy and not holy”: So, Francis, you’re saying that the Pope has no sense. You also display the foolish attitude that a lay person may not criticize, question or take a bishop to the woodshed. You are the problem; it is your idolatry that has brought the Church to such a state as being a haven for abortion promoting bishops, sodomy promoting bishops, and idol worshiping bishops. If this were not the case, then explain why half the laity wallows in these abominations and yet the bishops continue to stroke their feathers?

Posted Wednesday, May 30, 2012 1:51 PM By MIKE
Francis, I’m not sticking up for anyone. But we must never tolerate sin, or wrong teaching even if comes from a Bishop. Any Bishop (or Priest or Nun) who does not adhere to the CCC, needs to be corrected. Admonishing sinners is a Work of Mercy. However, we must always respect the Office of Bishop within the framework of the Hierachy of the Church. And we must respect all persons.

Posted Wednesday, May 30, 2012 1:55 PM By Francis
JLS: If the pope actually did divide bishops into holy and unholy, I think I would have heard about it, and I’m certain my parish bulletin would have announced whether our bishop is holy or not! Since nobody appointed me to monitor my bishop’s promotion of sodomy and idol-worship activities, I don’t need to take my bishop to the woodshed. If you or anyone else wants to criticize the bishop, go ahead; just please be civil about it, and have a read in the CCC part 3 article I about expected conduct. As for “half the laity wallow[ing] in abominations” I’m not sure what you refer to. My Catholic friends are consistently decent people. What are the most common abominations among your fellow parishoners?

Posted Wednesday, May 30, 2012 6:10 PM By Francis
MIKE: With all respect, I disagree. There is far more to being Catholic than what’s written in the CCC; that’s effectively the Readers’ Digest condensed version of our deposit of faith. Our preists and bishops spend many years in seminary studying, and most of us (me especially) don’t have time nor inclination to do all that study, get it right, and be competent to argue cogently with a preist or bishop. It is spiritual folly to think it possible to read the CCC and judge a bishop’s comments and behavior, especially when taken out of context. The present case is one where a bishop expressed an opinion about the most prudent way to pursue a goal he shares in common with his fellow bishops. Many of the comments on this page are shamefully uncharitable, and take zero account of the fact that we don’t know all the details of what’s discussed between bishops. Maybe YOU and many here don’t like how the bishop has carried out his official duties. I’m not suggesting that nobody should question the bishop’s behavior, just that questioning be respectful and mindful, rather than disdainful as I see here. Bishops are people, and the few I’ve met personally, though they range widely in temprament and “traditionality”, are extraordinarily decent people. Whatever their approach to fulfilling their offices, they deserve our respect.

Posted Wednesday, May 30, 2012 6:21 PM By Kenneth M. Fisher
Francis, Do you actually know any bishops, well I do, and some have asked me some very deliberate questions about their brother bishops. The late Bishop Austin Vaughan for instance, when I told him that I did not believe many of his brother bishops, because of their actions, believed in Hell, told me “oh no Ken, they believe in Hell, they just don’t believe that anyone goes there, and that is silly because why would Our Lord have gone through the Hell he went through on Calvary to save someone from a place no one goes to!” I have had other bishops ask me if a certain bishop was a Mason. You are living in a dream world in which all bishops are true servants of Our Lord, that dream world does not exists. It will only exists in the Kingdom of Heaven. God bless, yours in Their Hearts, Kenneth M. Fisher

Posted Wednesday, May 30, 2012 11:02 PM By Francis
Kenneth: I’m not trying to make a case that all bishops are of a single opinion all topics, nor that all bishops have equally traditional perspectives, nor even that every bishop is “right” every time he teaches. My case is that we PLEASE show them due respect whether we “like” them or not. In my very real world, all the bishops TRY very hard to be true servants of Our Lord, however imperfectly, and I am convinced that collectively they are doing a better job of it than could be done by anyone who’s contributed to this page (myself included). BTW: The Church has never declared any person (not even Judas Iscariot) to be in hell. Doesn’t mean there isn’t lots of company there,… just that we do not know who or if anyone actually is there.

Posted Thursday, May 31, 2012 3:31 AM By ANdrew Eppink
“Does not want bishops seen as anti-Obama” Why not? Obama is the most stridently pro abortion politician this nation has ever had to suffer. God Bless Dolan and the others w some backbone.

Posted Thursday, May 31, 2012 12:59 PM By JLS
Francis, the religion you are trumpeting is a popular one, the main doctrine of which is “in the Church we are all sinners”. This religion parrots the Catholic Church, which teaches that we are all “repentant” sinners, or should be. The religion you proclaim excludes the entire point of Jesus Christ Who died and rose so that we could attain Heaven. Faith without works, according to St James, is dead. A church of sinners is a dead church; however, a church of repentent sinners is a Church of works, a living Church, one on its way to Heaven.

Posted Thursday, May 31, 2012 1:03 PM By JLS
Francis, your posts exalting ignorance and justifying sin because “we’re all sinners” presents a classic case study in presumption. But should you study up on presumption, it would be best for you first to get a solid grip on the meaning of the phrase, “absolute apathy”. Once you get this down, then you might be ready to tackle “presumption”.

Posted Thursday, May 31, 2012 1:05 PM By JLS
Francis, the CCC does not claim to be the sum of the Deposit of Faith. It claims to be a book. So, what you are doing in your post is accusing people of worshiping the CCC as if it were an idol. The CCC directs and protects those who study it. The CCC itself is not a sacrament, but explains and trains for the sacramental experience.