The following email was sent to Cal Catholic on Nov. 28:
“Bishop Kevin Vann of Orange signed a letter in September asking the Federal government to used executive authority to deal with immigration. Letter was sent with no fanfare by a lobbying arm of the USCCB for immigration change. All very quiet. Why?:
From the letter:
On behalf of the Committee on Migration of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and of the Catholic Legal Immigration Network, Inc., we write to urge you to use your authority to protect undocumented individuals and families as soon as possible, within the limits of your executive authority. With immigration reform legislation stalled in Congress, our nation can no longer wait to end the suffering of family separation caused by our broken immigration system. Specifically, we ask that you take the following steps: First, we urge you to authorize deferred action for the following groups, consistent with current bars for those who have committed serious crimes:
Immigrants with strong community ties and equities in the United States and have lived in the United States for ten years or longer.
Undocumented persons who have resided in the United States for ten years or longer have built equities in our communities and contributed to our economy and our social fabric. Despite their contributions, they remain in the shadows and fear separation from their families. Providing them protection from deportation would permit them to come out of the shadows and fully contribute to our society as they get processed through the legal system.
Parents of U.S. citizens.
One of the tragedies of deportations has been the separation of parents from their U.S. citizen children. Parents are left with a heart-wrenching decision, to leave their children in the United States with family or friends, knowing they will not see them for a long time, or take them to a country they do not know. Children who see their parents removed and face long separations from them also are adversely impacted. They are the future leaders of our nation, yet removing them from their parents often confuses them and shakes their trust in our government. Moreover, these parents have no doubt built equities in our country—raised a family, bought homes, and started businesses—which would warrant consideration and the use of discretion in their removal.
Parents of recipients of Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA).
We applaud the decision in 2012 to provide deferred action to children and youth who entered the United States with their parents as minors. We now urge you to offer protection to the parents of DACA participants, so that they do not experience separation from their children.
Individuals residing in the United States with already approved family and employment petitions. Individuals living in the United States who have approved family-based or employment-based petitions and who are unable to receive permanent resident status because of visa backlogs or because of 3 and 10-year bars should receive deferred action. These individuals remain in the country but are unable to access their approved visa-petitions. Moreover, these individuals are already in the Department of Homeland Security database and are unlikely to be apprehended or deported.
Second, we urge you to take the following steps within the existing legal immigration system, which would help address concerns about the system we have expressed in the past:
Do not count derivatives against the cap for family-based petitions.
Currently, derivatives— spouses and children—are counted against the family quotas in the family-based immigration system, in part contributing to long waits in the family preference categories. However, counting derivatives against the cap is not required by law. In fact, Congress repealed language requiring this counting in the 1990 Immigration Act. We urge you not to count these derivatives in the future, so that families may be reunited in a more expeditious manner.
Expand eligibility for Provisional Unlawful Presence Waivers.
In March 2013, the U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services began permitting certain immigrant visa applicants who are spouses, children and parents of U.S. citizens to apply for provisional unlawful presence waivers in the U.S. before leaving for their visa interview abroad. Applying for a waiver in this country reduces the time that families are separated and reduces their financial and emotional hardships. Eligibility for a Provisional Unlawful Presence Waiver is currently limited to immediate relatives of U.S. citizens who can prove extreme hardship to their U.S. citizen spouse or parents. Eligibility for provisional waivers should be expanded to include all individuals who are currently eligible to apply for a waiver abroad. This would include all individuals applying for an immigrant visa who can prove extreme hardship to their U.S. citizen or lawful permanent resident (LPR) spouse or parents.
In addition, we urge you to consider expanding eligibility beyond individuals whose sole ground of inadmissibility is unlawful presence. Individuals who are inadmissible for other reasons should also be eligible to seek a waiver from within the United States to reduce the hardship on their U.S. citizen and LPR family members….
To read the entire letter, click here.
Oh for heavens sake, Bishop, enough with the efforts to legalize those who have entered our country illegally. Countries have a right to decide who can come into their countries and who can’t (Mexico, as an aside, has very strict immigration laws). Those who break our laws, rather 10 or more years ago or last week, need to be returned home. We need border security to seriously curtail the illegal immigration problem. And you need to go back to a focus on spiritual matters and leave politics to the politicians.
As a follow-up to your good comments, I would just like to note paragraph 2241 of the Catechism, which requires an immigrant to obey ALL of the laws of the receiving country (including, presumably the immigration laws). Thus, one may reasonably infer from this that illegal immigration is actually sinful. Why then are the bishops silent? Does their silence not make them complicit in the sin?
I hate the idea that the end justify the means. I feel people should do things right and not cheat to get a good? outcome. Reform is needed but allowing a president to be a dictator is not the solution. God is the ONLY just dictator.
CCC: ” 1759 “An evil action cannot be justified by reference to a good intention” (cf. St. Thomas Aquinas, Dec. praec. 6). The end does not justify the means. “
I hope we also get to read the Bishop’s letter to the Mexican government asking them to stop the unlawful immigration of their citizens into the USA. I’m sure the good Bishop will include a condemnation of all the injustices put upon the Mexican people by their government.
Yes, I would like to see a similar letter from the USCCB’s Committee on Migration to the Mexican and other Latin American Governments – to tell them to take care of their own people and stop breaking American laws.
Paul, I agree. Here is an interesting take on Mexico. One we won’t hear discussed by the “our immigration system is broken” crowd. 17 Mexican Billionaires. https://www.celebritynetworth.com/map/mexico/
Noticed that he hasn’t said that he’s willing to stop spending millions on his recently acquired glass-windowed edifice to help illegal immigrants (not that much had been done for the unemployed anyway).
Of course this is the same bishop who put a Democratic campaign worker on one of his committees, sat by while Common Core was adopted in his diocese, allows the LA REC to be held in his diocese, and has yet to impose Canon 915 on any politician.
Notice in his letter that he doesn’t mention this is really Amnesty II, where millions of illegals were let in during the Reagan Administration and the American public was told that this would be the only time this would happen.
Bob, excellent point.
The Diocese spent $57.7 MILLION – that they could have given to the poor in Latin American Diocese so people would not ILLEGALLY immigrate. And this is just the cost of the property, not renovations, maintenance, etc. It cost $2 Million just to refurbish the organ.
I read that just cleaning the 10,000 glass windows costs between $150,000 and $200.000 per year.
It is architecturally an ugly monstrosity that does not inspire one to holiness anyway.
One strong earthquake and it will all be gone. Man’s monument to man, prideful like the tower of babel.
Then the USCCB’s charities have the never to take money from the US taxpayers to help those they encourage to come into this Country illegally.
Each of us should immediately write to our US Senator and US Congressman, telling them that we do NOT support the “USCCB Committee on Migration” or those Bishops who choose to push their personal political agendas.
And that as a Catholic they do not represent us, but merely themselves as private American citizens.
They are using their Church titles for politics which is greatly resented if not immoral.
Until the Bishops start supporting STRONG BORDER CONTROL first,
and STOP SUPPORTING ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION – – – – –
they merely exacerbate the things they state they are trying to correct –
Breaking up of families;
Sexual trafficking;
Drug trafficking;
and making Latin American Gangs stronger in Latin American and importing their activity to the USA. (See FBI info regarding Gangs);
and Murder.
As others have stated, the “Catechism of the Catholic Church” contains the true Doctrine of the Faith, not personal beliefs of Clergy.
We are not required to support Clergy personal beleifs/ goals.
CCC: ” 2241 The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.
Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions,
especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them,
to obey its laws
and to assist in carrying civic burdens. ”
The USA is no longer prosperous. Our Federal debt is $17.9 TRILLION, most States are Hundreds of Billions of dollars in debt, and local governments also have excessive debt. (Paying debts is a requirement in the CCC # 2211)
There are not enough jobs for all able bodied Americans and those who are here legally. Over 49 MILLION Americans are on food stamps and other forms of government assistance.
As has been said before, the Wall of China is over 13,000 miles long.
Our border with Mexico is under 2,000 miles long.
With today’s heavy equipment and technology, the Army Corp of Engineers, able bodied persons on federal assistance who can not find work, and criminals who owe a debt to society – surely the USA can build a wall with entrances/exits for only legal immigration and legal trade.
Why do the Bishops based upon their actions, support ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION ?
They can help people in their own Countries if that is their desire, rather than encouraging relocation.
What more proof is needed that virtually all (with some few exceptions) of the American bishops need to be sacked? Sitting in free and plush and life-long accommodations, these overstuffed men need to find work trying to save souls. At the very least, America’s bishops need to learn the Faith, and then try to live it as examples to their flocks.
Now we have Bishop Vann, who perhaps has spent too many hours in the crystal splendor of his Protestant-inspired palace. (You know, the sun’s power is magnified by glass, so maybe it finally got to dear Bishop V.) Demanding, in effect, that the President of the United States — the man that is completely at odds with the Church, with its teachings and doctrines, and in much favor of abortion, that man — violate the US Constitution and ignore Congress. The Bishop has no authority to make this request, and his meddling in secular politics has added to the pending constitutional crisis now facing this country.
Certainly a bishop can make comment on social issues, such as abortion, sex outside marriage, living together, homosexual marriage — wait, wait: don’t most US Bishops actually support — or wink at — such sexual activities? Why yes, they do. Then, Bishop Vann is merely doing the will of his brothers? Why, yes, again Devoted One!!
What have we done to earn such weak and inferior men as our shepherds?
When are the BISHOPS going to address Latin American Gangs and CRIME that have been thriving in the USA due to Open Borders ?
Per the FBI – 2011 Gang Assessment in USA:
” Gangs are responsible for an average of 48 percent of violent crime in most jurisdictions and up to 90 percent in several others, according to NGIC analysis. Major cities and suburban areas experience the most gang-related violence. Local neighborhood-based gangs and drug crews continue to pose the most significant criminal threat in most communities.
Aggressive recruitment of juveniles and immigrants,
alliances and conflict between gangs, the release of incarcerated gang members from prison, advancements in technology and communication,
and Mexican Drug Trafficking Organization (MDTO) involvement in drug distribution have resulted in gang expansion and violence in a number of jurisdictions. ”
” Gangs are increasingly engaging in non-traditional gang-related crime, such as alien smuggling, human trafficking, and prostitution.
Gangs are also engaging in white-collar crime such as counterfeiting, identity theft, and mortgage fraud, primarily due to the high profitability and much lower visibility and risk of detection and punishment than drug and weapons trafficking.”
◾US-based gangs have established strong working relationships with Central American and MDTOs to perpetrate illicit cross-border activity, as well as with some organized crime groups in some regions of the United States.
US-based gangs and MDTOs are establishing wide-reaching drug networks; assisting in the smuggling of drugs, weapons, and illegal immigrants along the Southwest Border; and serving as enforcers for MDTO interests on the US side of the border. ”
https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/2011-national-gang-threat-assessment
More from the FBI –
” The US Southwest Border region represents a continuing criminal threat to the United States.
The rugged, rural, and porous area along the nearly 2,000 miles of contiguous US-Mexican territory invites widespread criminal activity, including drug and arms trafficking, alien smuggling, human trafficking, extortion, kidnapping, and public corruption. US-based gangs, MDTOs (MEXICAN DRUG TRAFFICKING ORGANIZATIONS), and other criminal enterprises in both the United States and Mexico are readily exploiting this fluid region and incur enormous profit by establishing wide-reaching drug networks;
assisting in the smuggling drugs, arms, and illegal immigrants; and serving as enforcers for MDTO interests on the US side of the border. ”
” Gang-related activity and violence has increased along the Southwest border region, as US-based gangs seek to prove their worth to the drug cartels, compete with other gangs for favor, and act as US-based enforcers for cartels which involves home invasions, robbery, kidnapping, and murder. ”
https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/2011-national-gang-threat-assessment/2011-national-gang-threat-assessment#GangsandtheUSBorder
Bishops, when are you going to publically speak against these sins, that are growing due to your lack of support for CLOSING the BORDER, and supporting more ILLEGAL immigration ?
Do you hate Americans so much that you do not care?
What do you really care about ? – Because those things you actively promote are harmful and cause harm – to all law abiding persons of good will.
This sure doesn’t fit the “they come here to work and seek a better life” scenario does it. Be ready to hear that the above issues are a result of “white racists”
On average Bishops are very ignorant in assessing the full and evil consequences of their own actions when they get involved in politics which does not involve one of the intrinsic evils – Abortion, Euthanasia, Contraception, Homosexual Marriage, Human Cloning, or Embryonic Stem Cell Research.
The Bishops’ focus is very narrow and incomplete, and therefore full of errors which negatively affects society.
They should focus on teaching for the Salvation of Souls – which should be their primary task.
In addition it is not the Clergy’s role, but the role of the Laity to be involved in politics / temporal affairs (CCC 898).
I would like to ask all Bishops to stop taking Grant Money from the Government.
And no longer involve itself in illegal activity – in support of ILLEGAL immigration.
“ON the SERVICE of CHARITY” which went into effect Dec., 2012, all charities that call themselves Catholic – must not accept money from any organization that violates the Faith, must not give money or grants to any organization that violates the Faith, and must teach the Gospel so that they do not become merely another social services organization.
https://www.vatican.va/holy_father/benedict_xvi/motu_proprio/documents/hf_ben-xvi_motu-proprio_20121111_caritas_en.html
Jesus never taught us to partner with any government to help the poor.
And the US government promotes some intrinsic evils, so you must not take money from them.
The end does not justify the means, – CCC 1759.
Maria, you write an interesting set of comments. So, do not take this as a criticism. You, like so many others on this site, call for the Bishops to stop doing whatever they are doing and concentrate on the “saving of souls.” It would be interesting to know what you mean by that statement. What should a Bishop, and by extension Priests, do differently? What would their day look like? What would they give up and what would they take up. I have known several Bishops who are concerned with ensuring the salvation of souls, after they get their admin work done, but they do it in different ways. What would you like to see the Bishops do differently?
You just gave me a thought, Bob One. What if our diocese were designed so the faithful had more one on one contact with their bishop. Shouldn’t the average Catholic have an opportunity to attend a Mass at least once a year by their Bishop? Imagine how our Church would change if there were a Bishop for every 25 or 30 parishes!! With fewer and fewer priests and parishes, we may have to really rethink the role of the bishop. Taken to the extreme, we might have to return to a time when a Bishop is the principle celebrant at a mass, maybe 3 or 4 each Sunday, and some parishes might only have a full mass once a month, or even less frequently. This is certainly what the Bishops of Brazil are facing now, which is why they are about to ask the Pope to ordain married priests. Not taking a position on any of these questions, just throwing out the thought. Our world is changing, the faces of our church are changing, and we can meet the changes with healthy adaptation, or we can keep doing what we have been doing and possibly die in the process.
Yes, Bob One. Thank you for your question.
1) Bishops and by extension Priests should TEACH the Faith in entirety.
Actively promote the reading of both Sacred Scripture and the CCC by all literate persons at home.
This should be encouraged through prominent places in Diocese web sites, Parish web sites, Parish bulletins, other Diocese communications, and even posters in the Narthex of each Church.
2) They should make certain that all their own employees have read and adhere to the CCC in entirety as a condition of employment.
This includes Catholic schools as well.
3) The Bishop is responsible for everything Catholic within his Diocese – this is his job.
4) He should preach through all his available forms of media, about the intrinsic evils of: abortion, euthanasia, contraception, homosexual marriage, human cloning, and embryonic stem cell research. (- Do not wait for a secular political crisis regarding these evils.)
And preach about the need to repent to Save our Souls – using Jesus’s words.
Occasionally preach about the 4 last things of Death, Judgment, Heaven, Hell.
Occasionally preach about marriage and the other sacraments.,
Always using Sacred Scripture and the CCC to insure accuracy.
5) He should insist that his Priests (and himself) adhere 100% to GIRM for the OF Mass – to transmit the Sacredness.
He should insist that the Laity also adhere to GIRM for the same reason, not doing the hokey pokey during the Lord’s prayer and giving the high 5 to people several pews away.
And with the exception of INTRINSIC EVILS – where there can be no prudential judgment, the Bishop must stay OUT of POLITICS, and the job of the LAITY.
A true Bishop (Shepherd) does not have time to do the job of the Laity, if he takes his own job seriously.
CCC: 898 “By reason of their special vocation it belongs to the laity to seek the kingdom of God by engaging in temporal affairs and directing them according to God’s will. . . .
It pertains to them in a special way so to illuminate and order all temporal things with which they are closely associated
that these may always be effected and grow according to Christ and maybe to the glory of the Creator and Redeemer.”
The Bishops need to teach the sanctification of Sunday, not taking the Lord’s name in vain.
The breaking of these commandments are just as offensive as breaking the 5th and 7th.
The thorough teaching of the 4th and 8th Commandments is also necessary. So much revenue in the US is based on breaking the 9th and 10th commandments.
But of course the lack of love for God and the lack of love for neighbor also needs correction.
People now justify breaking every Commandment. The whole moral backbone has eroded. These things that you think they should always teach about are grave sins but people need to learn the basics.
100 million people in the US are unchurched. It is a great harvest that needs workers. Obey the Lord. Matthew 9:37-38
Maria, did you know that deportation is an intrinsic moral evil?
from Pope John Paul II. Quoting Gaudium et Spes, he says that intrinsically evil acts are “any kind of homicide, genocide, abortion, euthanasia and voluntary suicide; whatever violates the integrity of the human person, such as mutilation, physical and mental torture and attempts to coerce the spirit; whatever is offensive to human dignity, such as subhuman living conditions, arbitrary imprisonment, deportation, slavery, prostitution and trafficking in women and children; degrading conditions of work which treat laborers as mere instruments of profit, and not as free responsible persons: all these and the like are a disgrace … and they are a negation of the honor due to the Creator” (Veritatis Splendor, 80)
DEPORTATION of those who BREAK the LAW does NOT violate Church teaching – per Pope John Paul II –
who personally promulgated the “Catechism of the Catholic Church” which contains the Doctrine of the Faith.
See CCC – # 2241
The innocent (those who immigrate legally) should not be deported.
YFC says, “Maria, did you know that deportation is an intrinsic moral evil?” = Never attempt to win by force what can be won by deception.”
― Niccolò Machiavelli,
YFC, You were in frothing foaming at the mouth favor of cruelly deporting the Christian homeschool family back to Germany so the police could arrest the parents and remove their children. You even said that they had no Constitutional rights to remain in the United States. The bevy of Saul Alinskiite trolls who use the moniker YFC are certainly not communicating with one another.
It’s all about money. That’s all these guys care about – not us, not our souls but money so they can keep their lifestyle.
Pretty crass view of the episcopate. Please try to show some respect. None of this is about money for the bishops. If they wanted money or lifestyle, they could downsize chancery staff and/or starve the parishes with assessments.
“Anonymous” you are being wilfully ignorant, again. American bishops and their group, the USCCB, are careerists, preening idolators of money, and of status within the Church (again, with a few exceptions). They live for money, for position, for power, and very little for teaching the Faith, and urging people to amend their lives to achieve salvation.
“Ryan” is more correct, than not, bishops show little concern about the “souls” of people, and of the impact of sin (or even the reality of sin). They are engaged with the simply crazy arguments of people like Cardinal Wuerl about “discipline” as somehow trumping doctrine, and redefining sin.
These are true “girly men”, feminized and loving it, happy to rub shoulders with our Abortionist-in-Chief (as long as the food is plentiful) and to shout “bravo” to a lost young man who believes that he is a homosexual (instead of running to him, and seeking to point him toward the vile sin of sodomy and the real chance of salvation, if he repents of it). They want nothing to show them in any way to be other than happy guys to do whatever the new Chief tells them he likes (especially if he is Liberal; as many, many bishops disliked Benedict and disobeyed him openly).
The Church is going to continue to collapse “like a house of cards” which is what Francis said would happen if it did not ditch Tradition and embrace the soul-killing poison of modernity. You are wrong, and Ryan is pretty much correct (with a few exceptions).
Anonymous – Please explain the $57+ spent for the Cathedral when it should have gone to help the poor & sick. The same thing was done in Oakland and they are close to bankruptcy. Maybe the Bishops should show us some respect and start listening to us. It’s all about money!!!
US Bishops deserve a wake up call – even if it is crass.
Like when Jesus threw out the money changers from the Temple and called the Pharisees hypocrites.
Other than their own jobs which many do very poorly – which is to accurately and fully teach the Faith – – –
Bishops needs to STAY out of POLITICS (except for the 6 Intrinsic evils where there can be no prudential judgment).
Teaching the Faith very poorly is proven by the mass exodus of Catholics to Protestant Faiths.
The bishops are giving Cesar what belongs to God.
Once again who is going to pay for all of these ILLEGAL ALIENS? First stop comparing these law breakers as just another lawful immigrant, it insults me when I hear this from liberals, my great grand parents came here on the ship from Eastern Europe and learned English assimilated into American culture as did all European immigrants of that era. Now in California you don’t have to speak English, signs, DMV, billboards, TV & radio stations, menus at McDonalds, banks, the list goes on and on are all in Spanish!! This is what White liberals have wanted for decades to destroy this country and replace the Europeans with non-white immigrants, the reason for this is still a puzzle to me. Obama has just insured this with his amnesty for not 5 million lets be honest for over 20 million illegal aliens that will NEVER ASSIMILATE into American culture they don’t have to why should they everything is given to them on a silver platter. Yes yes I know I will be called a racist, xenophobe, nazi and all the other comments by liberals. But just remember the Latino racist group called “La Raza” it means the RACE in Spanish, could you imagaine if there was a White group calling themselves the RACE and advocated the dominance of Whites all hell would break loose. La Raza advocates the return of California, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Arizona, Texas, New Mexico and Colorado to Mexico once again. They make no if and’s or buts about this they call this region Atzlan it is the “Nahuatl” word for these states. There is no stopping the onslaught from the Southern borders and the birthrate is beyond belief, so in a few short decades or less the entire West and Southwest will be an extension of Mexico.
Good for Bishop Vann!
Wow. Apparently there isn’t a lot of love here for the poor and disenfranchised. Where do you conservative Catholics think Jesus would fall on this issue? What Would Jesus Do?
Panthermom, Jesus would never break the law;
nor would he encourage others to break the law.
He would not be involved in governmental politics.
He would not take government grants to partner with the Government.
He would probably ask each of us to send assistance to those parishes in Latin America, that need assistance.
Please contribute to the collection for the Church in Latin America taken up the weekend of Jan. 24-25.
I would love to donate to the Church in Latin America.
However due to the sins of MANY at the USCCB and its charities CCHD, Catholic Charities, and CRS, and their partnering with the Federal Government receiving approx. $63 MILLION in GRANTS annually.
And they are paying Carolyn Woo head of the CRS almost half a BILLION dollars in annual compensation.
“Don’t Write that CHECK” – 2014-12-04
https://www.churchmilitant.tv/platform/?today=2014-12-04
When Faithful Catholics can not trust those in charge at the USCCB, we have to give directly to those in need such as locally St. Vincent de Paul.
Any suggestions on how we can bypass the USCCB bunch to give to the needy in Latin America ?
Btw did you know that Mexico is the Mexico the ninth largest producer of oil in the world and the eleventh largest in terms of net exports. It is the third largest oil producer in the Western Hemisphere behind the United States and Canada. Mexico has the eighteenth largest oil reserves in the world, and fourth largest in the Western Hemisphere behind Venezuela, Canada, and the United States.
The Mexican Government has an obligation to its own people too.
Sorry – my TYPO Carolyn Woo head of the USCCB’s CRS makes a half a MILLION in compensation each year.
(Not Billion).
I don’t think it is due to what you think.
The bishops don’t carry out their responsibilities very well in their own dioceses, so when they attempt to weigh in on national issues, they do so in their official capacity (as opposed to their private opinions) which has the potential effect of implying that he speaks for all Catholics in his diocese. Obviously, this is not the case.
Somehow it is appropriate that it Is Advent…Even Mary and Joseph obeyed the state as they returned home for the census.
We have laws in this country and when people ignore them, they suffer the consequences. The president chose to ignore these laws and hopefully the “checks and balances” will correct his actions. It is made worse when the bishops agree with the president to ignore the law. Further, we went through all of this before with a “conservative” president, never to happen again.
So there will be no misunderstanding in Congress,
all interested Catholics should write to our elected representatives and make it clear that we do not support the Bishops regarding ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION, and that they merely speak their own opinions – hardly enough votes to bother with.
Also state we want the Borders closed to ILLEGAL IMMIGRATION – immediately.
And the Federal Government should not give US tax dollar / grants to any religious groups. or special interest groups that do not benefit the entire US population.
So there will be no misunderstanding in Congress,
I have spoken with my congresswoman and asked her to support the President’s action, so that the compassion we are called upon as TRUE Catholics, committed to the poor and the downtrodden, can see the light of day in public policy.
Panther mom writes, “What Would Jesus Do?” = You are NOT the least bit interested in the poor and disenfranchised or what Jesus would do, hence you’re wicked brand of support for our very distracted bishops.
See CCD’s story regarding the California woman who moved to Oregon to commit suicide
Panthermom says:
October 15, 2014 at 9:01 am
“While we may not agree it it, God gives people the self-determination to make their own educated decisions. Let’s hope that Brittany finds her peaceful end surrounded by love and support.”
Panthermom, Your own posted words show that apparently there is a lot of love there for the educated decision and self-determination to commit suicide. How dare you say or infer that God gave Brittany or gives others “the self-determnation” to make educated decisions to commit suicide. You’re name is appropriate for you sound just like a black hearted deceiving devil prowling about the world inviting others to despair and even calling the family support for such despair “love”. What does it profit a man if he deceives himself into thinking that he is in charge of his so- called “peaceful end” only to find himself suffering for all eternity in the fires of hell.
Be careful of Politicians…Corporate Yes Men and Smiling Faces
Father Kevin Vann NEVER once helped Stephen Brady of Roman Catholic Faithful to protect the sheep who were living here in the United States legally and being harmed by the lavender mafia. The new Monsignor was handsomely rewarded for his silence and loyalty to the local lieutenants of the lavender mafia by being placed on the zooming quick fast track to bishop in order to be another yes man in lock step with the other bishops who no longer place the salvation of souls as a priority. Bishop Vann is a good ol’ company yes man who is buffering up the Democratic vote. While Bishop Vann was in Fort Worth a mother was publicly berated at Mass by her pastor simply for kneeling down for Holy Communion with her little daughter. This mother wrote a heartfelt letter to Bishop Vann to convey her deep sadness at being humiliated just for kneeling down. After the horrific scandals with Bishop Daniel Ryan one would think that Bishop Vann would be eager to comfort this mother who was one of his own flock and only trying to show reverence to God. NO, he did NOT comfort her. Bishop Vann took the side of the pastor who publicly berated this Catholic mother for kneeling with her young daughter. Now Bishop Vann expects the faithful to think that he truly cares about the plight of the illegal immigrant when history shows that he has not cared about the plight of his own flock who has not broken any laws.
continued…
Continued from:
December 2, 2014 at 3:29 pm
Taken from Roman Catholic Faithful,-
“To wit, this author, who did the initial reporting for The Wanderer in 1997 and 1998 in the case of the perversion of Bishop Daniel Ryan, knows first-hand that a well-known priest, the late Father John A. Hardon, S.J., went to Rome in early 1997 with a priest who had been molested by Ryan. Father Hardon and the priest met in the private residence of the Prefect of the Congregation for the Clergy, Dario Cardinal Castrillion Hoyos. Ryan was kept in power for yet another two and one-half years.
Courageous Stephen G. Brady, the founder and President of Roman Catholic Faithful, Inc., has kept the Ryan team in place. One of Ryan’s chief enablers, Father Kevin Vann, was appointed recently by Benedict XVI to be the bishop of Fort Worth, Texas! Whatever disagreements Pope Leo IX had with the severe prescriptions recommended by Saint Peter Damian, it can be said that Pope Leo IX recognized he had a problem in his hands and he had to find some way to discipline, not to reward, bishops and priests steeped in lives of unnatural vice.”
continued….
continued from Dec. 2, 2014
Google Roman Catholic Faithful – AD MAJOREM DEI GLORIAM
One Diocese Crumbles As The Bishop Loses Control
“Another former member of the Springfield hierarchy was Monsignor Kevin Vann, who was pastor of Blessed Sacrament parish in Springfield. He also held several positions within the hierarchy and was made Monsignor (along with the others who protected Bishop Ryan) by Bishop George Lucas. Vann refused to take any action regarding Monsignor Renken’s and Monsignor Steffen’s homosexual living arrangement even after I confronted him about it. Vann was Renken’s friend and co- worker within the chancery. What happened to Vann? What did his silence cost him? How was he punished for his part in this ongoing cover-up? For the answer, let’s turn to a news article by Darren Barbee and Brett Hoffman that appeared in Knight Rider Newspapers”
“FORT WORTH, Texas – (KRT) – Monsignor Kevin W. Vann of Illinois has been named co-adjutor bishop of the Fort Worth Roman Catholic Diocese and will succeed ailing Bishop Joseph Delaney when he retires, church officials announced this week.
Taken from Catholic Answers
Jesus talked about hell more often than he talked about heaven. Here are some verses.
The children of the kingdom will be driven out into the darkness where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth (Mt 8:12).
Depart from me, you accursed, into that eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels (Mt 25:41).
These will pay the penalty of eternal ruin, separated from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power (2 Thes 1:9).
God did not spare the angels who fell into sin; he thrust them down to hell, chained them there in the abyss, to await their sentence in torment (2 Pt 2:4).
The smoke of the fire that torments them will rise forever and ever, and there will be no relief day or night for those who worship the beast or its image or accept the mark of its name (Rv 14:11).
Jesus talked about hell more often than he talked about heaven. Here are some verses.
The children of the kingdom will be driven out into the darkness where there will be wailing and grinding of teeth (Mt 8:12).
Depart from me, you accursed, into that eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels (Mt 25:41).
These will pay the penalty of eternal ruin, separated from the presence of the Lord, and from the glory of his power (2 Thes 1:9).
The smoke of the fire that torments them will rise forever and ever, and there will be no relief day or night for those who worship the beast or its image or accept the mark of its name (Rv 14:11).
Catherine, all of your information is very interesting. I used to follow Roman Catholic Faithful and Brady’s courageous work, but haven’t heard about them in a long time. That lay people have to go to these lengths is abominable! One of the saints said that the road to hell was paved with…. bishops. May they all experience true conversion.
“Panthermom”: One thing that Jesus would likely not do is petition Caesar or Pontius Pilate for some social or economic reform. Things were reasonably difficult in Judea at that time, and the people were heavily taxed (take a read or listen to BIll O’Reilly’s “Killing Jesus” on this issue; informative). Yet, Christ did not protest, or stage rallies, or join in any of the ever-present rebellions of the time against Rome. He merely said, “Render unto Casear” that which is Caesar’s.
You did touch on a critical point, however. If what Christ said is meaningful (although one wonders today if anyone much cares within the Church what Christ said), then what is a priest, bishop, cardinal or Pope to do? Really, only two things: (1) be holy; and (2) seek to lead others to Christ and earn salvation.
Remember that we are not to be of the world, “And be not conformed to this world, but be reformed in the newness of your mind, that you may provie what is the good, and the acceptable, and the perfect will of God”. Romans 12:2 (DRA). But then, you need to be a believer to follow this, so most of the clergy, who are completely in and of the world, ignore it. Much better to lecture, go to lush parties, have public adulation, and all that, than to preach the Faith, and have many, many people mock you, hate you, and attack you. Our bishops are craven to the world.
ALL ILLEGAL IMMIGRANTS must go to the back of the line in the US immigration process.
And no benefits that are afforded to citizens.
Deport all those who break the law – IMMEDIATELY and without a protracted trial.
I agree with you in principal. Now, tell me how you are going to deport three million or more people. Are you willing to send back the illegal parents who came here twenty years ago but let their legal children stay here? What about the hundreds who cross the border each day at our checkpoints? The fence hasn’t helped. How would you deport them and keep them out? No one has been able to come up with a solution yet. How would you do it?
One does not need to start immediate deportation of those who are here ILLEGALLY.
1) Immediate deportation for those who commit additional crimes – whether they have family here or not.
2) ILLEGALS should NOT get ANY benefits from the government; but as a humanitarian effort should be offered government provided transportation back to their own Country if they can not afford to live here.
3) The border fence has never been completed, and Border Patrols are underfunded and therefore inadequate.
4) ILLEGALS should not be able to get through checkpoints; all entering must be able to provide VISAs, or GREEN CARDs to get into this Country.
(In this computerized age complete with pictures and fingerprints,, it is easy to check whether these Visas and Green Cards are legal or forged.)
Keith you don’t understand US immigration law. That is not surprising! It is a very esoteric point of law. Very very few people do get immigration law, so I don’t fault you for it. People in line for immigration face extroardinarily protracted lines to reach a judge. Family members of legal US residents can wait a decade and a half for a hearing. Is that what you mean by “without a protracted trial”? So to be clear, some family members have to wait fifteen years to get their family in front of an immigration judge. Yes, that is the protracted trial we are talking about, not some random person who wants to enter the US. THIS is the atrocity that the American Bishops are trying to take a stand against.
YFC writes, “Keith you don’t understand US immigration law. That is not surprising! It is a very esoteric point of law. Very very few people do get immigration law, so I don’t fault you for it.” = Real Translation = “Uh Oh! Keith just posted something really really good. I’m hoping that if I use the word “esoteric” I can get very very few people to pay attention to Keith’s extremely logical post.”
YFC,
You know what is not surprising? Your ability to forget your history of posting gaffes. The reason being..”No man has a good enough memory to be a successful liar.” Please cut the phony violin string playing about long protracted lines to reach a judge. You’ve already royally cooked and exposed your unsympathetic goose when you stated that the Christian homeschooling family from Germany had no Constitutional rights to remain in the United States. You were not worried one single solitary bit about the protracted suffering that was in store for that family. You wanted them sent back to Germany because they cannot be manipulated and groomed to be future Democratic voters and have no problem understanding God’s natural law.
Your Fellow Catholic: it does not matter how long it takes. This is not an excuse to break the law.
However, the speed to make the decisions to both DEPORT or allow individuals to stay should be an area that needs correction.
It takes far too long to deport people as well as allowing them to stay legally.
Christ would never break the law. He said GIVE TO CAESAR WHAT IS CAESAR’S. Moral laws have to be obeyed. There is NOTHING IMMORAL about enforcing border laws. Just try and sneak into Switzerland, or Mexico for that matter. Besides killing the innocent babies in the womb, Obama is killing the middle class. Thank you, Bishop Vann for supporting Obama who has destroyed America, disgraced Christianity, and mocked the Catholic Church. YOU, and your liberal pals in the hierarchy will be held accountable to God for the evil you promoted! Ave Maria Purrissima!
We are the only country in the world who allows visitors to give birth outside their own countries and then call those babies citizens. This has to stop. There are numerous thriving “birth tourism” businesses here in California. I hear that “birth tourism” is also taking place in Florida, as well as U.S. territories, for the same purpose. Our government officials who are sworn to protect and defend the U.S. Constitution are traitors who are seeing to the destruction of our culture and way of life.
“Her business also helps the women navigate the logistics of obtaining American birth certificates, passports, and Social Security numbers for their babies before they fly home to China.”
“NBC News found dozens of web sites offering packages to expectant parents from around the world, including China, South Korea, Turkey and Eastern Europe. They advertise birth tourism centers in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Chicago, Miami, and New York.”
“Some of the Web sites blatantly advertise the advantages of free public school in America, a chance to get grants to colleges like Harvard and Yale, and an easier path for the whole family to get green cards once the child turns 21.”
https://rockcenter.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/03/07/17225891-born-in-the-usa-birth-tourists-get-instant-us-citizenship-for-their-newborns
The fourteenth amendment to the U.S. Constitution states that all people born in the U.S. are citizens. Period. If a mother comes across the border illegally, and has a baby while she is here, that baby is as much a citizen of the U.S. as any other person born in this country.
True, Jesus did not break any laws of the Roman Empire in Judea, Our Lord obeyed the laws of the Empire so what gives the invaders from our Southern borders the right to break our laws?????
Do you mean to say that when he overturned tables in the Temple that Jesus did so lawfully? Or that when he declare himself KIng, he could do so without violating Roman law regarding Caesar?
The TEMPLE was considered the House of God. Jesus is God. Therefore the Temple was built in His honor.
TRUTH trumps lies. JESUS always told the TRITH and He is King.
JESUS never broke any just laws.
You are reaching YFC, anything to go against Jesus. Keep on posting errors and we will keep correcting you.
On a side note the new Archbishop of Chicago Blaise Cupich just said he would not deny ANY politician Holy Communion even if they support the killing of the unborn! Of course he would not no surpise here, when he was bishop of Spokane he FORBADE his priests from praying outside abortion clinics. And the S.S.P.X. are still out in the cold and not in communion wtih Rome what a joke!! Oh and by the way Cupich was very upset that at his installation Mass which should be called enthronment Mass there was not enough “Altar girls” and female lay lectors running around the” praise area” as they call the sanctuary now not the Altar of Sacrifice. Way to go and get those vocations!!!!!
The SSPX are where they want to be, not where the Church wants them. Pope Benedict XVI strongly desired them to rejoin the Church. They would not and it even led to a schism in the SSPX.
Abp. Cupich is entirely feminized, a perfect Bergoglian example of the Catholic leader. Where is the masculine? Where is the defense of the Faith, the willingness to fight? Ohhh, nooooo — not enough girls in the sanctuary, waaahhh!!
In fact, women should never be in a Catholic sanctuary. It is not a Baptist Sunday chicken dinner, where the ladies put together the chicken along with some lemonade and fixin’s. But, to many, many Catholics, that is what the Mass represents — a sort of Catholic “Happy Meal” prepared by the busy women that swarm all over the altar area. What a complete and utter joke (except to the girly men that like this sort of thing).
The Mass is a re-enactment of Christ’s sacrifice — his bloody and dying body is directly above the TLM (and somewhere around the N.O. — even though Benedict, aware of the incongruity, ordered that it be center on all altars where the Mass is said, versus populum). We partake of His Body and His Blood — not corn dogs and chicken legs and potato salad was ever intended. This is serious business: sacrifice, death, and resurrection.
Abp. Cupich is the Pope’s man, alright. He will be prancing around, giving our communion to all the baby-killers, sodomites, adulterers, and fornicators that want it. Good Catholics should rise up against such liturgical sissies.
Wrong, “Anonymous”. The SSPX leadership very much believes that it should reconcile with the Pope. It seemed as if a deal would be reached, until very strong demands came via Cardinal Muller regarding allegiance to everything Vatican II.
This is a wonderful group of spiritual men, and a fast growing one, at that. Compared to the apostate bishops and disbelieving (and misbehaving) priests the mainline Church has now (and simply awful liturgy), it is doubly difficult not to admire the SSPX and wish for it to be within the Church.
Yet, the problem is a political one, and Francis may just shrug and let them formally rejoin the Church. But, to the evil and to the lost, the SSPX is trouble. They brook no disagreement with fundamental Catholicism and are strong in their Faith. Perhaps they would be at odds with the Pope in that they will not take the garbage that Abp. Cupich, Cardinals Dolan and Wuerl and others are handing out. Still, they need to be within the Church. Too long away makes their hearts grow harder, particularly as they face the need for more bishops (which will set off a new firestorm of condemnation from the Church and renewed excommunications — which is what the many, many bishops that simply hate Tradition wish to happen).
Pray for Bishop Fellay and all the priests and bishops of the SSPX.
I guess you are not up on things. Can’t gossip. You can google. No Bishop hates Tradition. Tradition and Scripture of the inerrant revelation of God. You seem to be glamorizing and misrepresenting. The problem is not political; it is doctrinal.
So what doctrine changed in VII, mous. I thought there was to be no change in doctrine, for that was what was put forth at the outset of the council.
You cannot have it both ways, friend, although you try very hard to make it so.
You can’t say that a group has no disagreement with fundamental Catholicism and then complain that they are told that they are required to give allegiance to Vatican II. Allegiance to all the ecumenical councils is required for all catholics. That is fundamental.
Allegiance to that which is unclear and can be interpreted myriad ways is rather tricky business, YFC. That is no doubt why there is no desire to readdress those open doors, the very same Cardinal Kasper is making grinning use of to push his own agenda – nothing in the hermeneutic of continuity.
“Your Fellow Catholic” and “Anonymous”: Don’t you make yourselves tired just trying to say negative things about the True Faith? So much wrong with what you say, here is but a short list:
1. Vatican II Belief Is Not Required: As a good nubmer of theologians and commenters have argued, “Even Benedict-Ratzinger admitted: “The truth is that this particular Council defined no dogma at all, and deliberately chose to remain on a modest
level, as a merely pastoral council; and yet many treat it as though it had made itself into a sort of ‘superdogma,’ which takes away the importance of all the rest” (1988 Address to Chilean Newbishops).
2 Many Bishops Despise Tradition: One of the first group to meet with Pope Francis was a group of Italian bishops that asked the Pope to, in effect, suspend “Summorum Pontificum”. To his credit, Francis declined (although he clearly went down this path with the Franciscan Friars (and SIsters) of the Immaculate, and he is likely not through yet).
You two can say that you really like modernity, really like the Zombie-Liberals, really like the draft Relatio, all of that, but do not attempt to misstate the truth here. That is a cardinal sin of Liberals, to say something like, “well, this or that is binding” or, “all bishops respect tradition,” and then act as if you said something valid. Stop it. Act like men and say what you believe, not some repeat of a lie that Liberals say in an effort to throw-off believers from learning what is good and true.
There is one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church. I hope you are not referring to anything else as the True Faith.
People disagreed with the Church before Vatican II, also. If there was something people didn’t agree with they just ignored it. People just went “oh phooey” or “pish posh”.
The Second Vatican Council is not unclear. If you lack clarity, seek clarity from pastors within the Church. Don’t go wondering off to foreign fields, just because you need classes to see clearly the grass that is under your feet.
St. Christopher, the question as to whether an ecumenical council, even a “pastoral” council is optional in terms of the faith required by the faithful, is such an important question, that I need to get back to you so that you won’t just believe what I say, but what Pontiffs and Bishops have taught before and after Vatican II.
The Preview is that you are absolutely and completely wrong. You are taking Benedict’s words completely out of context. He has never ever said that an assent of faith was not required of VII. He simply said there were no “superdogmas” declared there, as though any could have been declared there, as though anyone said that a superdogma was declared there, as though any Pope or Decree or Council had ever declared a superdogma. He never ever said that you as a catholic were not required to submit to the Council and give it the assent of your faith. And your quote certainly does not provide any proof for your position.
…if the council is not unclear, YFC, then how is it cited to endorse all manner of that which is different from one diocese to the next? Open to interpretation = unclear and/or imprecise. (The grass under the progressive feet has turned to Astro turf, my friend, but the preference for Astro turf won’t magically render it grass.)
That said the Catechism of the Catholic Church must also be given assent, and yet, mous, the CCC edition 1 was followed by CCC edition 2 specifically to clear up that which was misleading and unclear.
Giving assent to ‘could be black, could be white, could be grey’ depending on which Bishop you ask is not the ‘Catholic’ Faith. Despite the desperate scramble to make it so.
Without precision and clear teaching, the Church would be rendered little more than Pilate staring Christ in the face and saying, “What is Truth?” Whereupon her representatives will wash their hands and walk away at one with the state at the expense of their covenant with God.
Prayers to be sure, St. Christopher. No easy business this political wrangling. Would be nice to get back to the deposit of the Faith and teach it!
“Anonymous” and “Your Fellow Catholic”: How often can you guys be wrong? There must be a stake around here somewhere.
Look, you are simply making noise here. The Church is casting around for ways to make its “pastoral” council as something like a “theological super-nova”. Much, much literature exists that, for the substantial part, says just what Benedict said, the Council was not intended to say anything new by way of dogma and that you cannot, retroactively, make what was said, dogmatic. Start with Michael Davies, “The Second Vatican Council and Religious Liberty” (1992), although there are others.
In fact, and Michael Davies and others will say this, the true problem with Vatican II is in its implementation. And, why is that? Because, as Cardinal Kasper himself admitted, a good number of Vatican II documents were written in an ambiguous manner — the “time bombs” often mentioned — so that later “implementation” can take much, much liberal paths than could possibly have been planned during the Council. The treatment of such “ambiguity” by the way, is a chief reason that the SSPX has not reconciled with the Church. Under Benedict, it seemed that there would be a system to “correct ambiguities” but that was ultimately squelched by Vatican Liberals. The movement to declare Vatican II as “dogmatic” is a movement to affirm the interpretations of these ambiguities.
So very sad (except to Satan).
For starters, check out Canon Law. And by the way, where did you ever get the silly notion that you only have to give assent of the will and intellect to dogmas only?
Can. 752 Although not an assent of faith, a religious submission of the intellect and will must be given to a doctrine which the Supreme Pontiff or the college of bishops declares concerning faith or morals when they exercise the authentic magisterium, even if they do not intend to proclaim it by definitive act; therefore, the Christian faithful are to take care to avoid those things which do not agree with it.
Can. 754 All the Christian faithful are obliged to observe the constitutions and decrees which the legitimate authority of the Church issues in order to propose doctrine and to proscribe erroneous opinions, particularly those which the Roman Pontiff or the college of bishops puts forth.
The Church is casting around for ways to make its “pastoral” council as something like a “theological super-nova”.
Huh?
Do you even go to a Catholic Church?
If you do, what has happened at your parish to make you say that?
Quite frankly, it makes no sense.
YFC, you nailed it:
“…when they exercise the *authentic* magisterium.”
That which is unclear or open to myriad interpretation (to include misinterpretation) is not *authentic* magisterium. For teaching which is unclear, but open to interpretation cannot be wholly binding for it can be said to be interpreted a ‘different’ way. But it is telling that you would defend the necessity of submission to ambiguity while attempting on other threads to promote your homsexual sexual advocacy as a ‘small moral’ disagreement with regard to Church moral teaching and less-than-advanced ‘understanding’ of human sexuality. What an absolute JOKE.
They say that Cardinal Wuerl of Washington, D.C. had a lot to do with Cupich’s appointment. This is the same cardinal that refuses to use Canon 915 against any politicians, too. I guess there are no CINO politicians in D.C., right?
Cardinal O’Malley of Boston apparently feels the same way, as evidenced by Kennedy and Kerry.
Here is Cardinal Donald Wuerl (of Washington DC) committing heresy – in his own words (short video).
https://cmtvnews.com/2014/10/28/the-vortex-plotting-revolution/
Sacred Scripture is the speech of God in ENTIRTY (CCC 81).
Sacred Scripture about Receiving Unworthily – 1 Cor 11:27-30.
Jesus teaching on adultery and the need for repentance.
Teaching on homosexual acts, etc
CCC contains the DOCTRINE of the FAITH – which additionally teaches about the mortal sins of Sacrilege, Scandal, that those in the public and obstinate state of Mortal Sin must not receive Holy Communion,
the need for repentance via Confession (which requires a firm purpose of amendment not to commit the sin again) PRIOR to receiving Holy Communion, that one can not obtain grace while in the state of Mortal Sin, etc., etc,
Donald Wuerl is a dishonest man. Not receiving Holy Communion while in the state of Mortal sin is – Church Doctrine, which Wuerl publically denies.
Wuerl states that this is merely “pastoral”.
Pope Francis appointed Wuerl to his Committee which makes recommendations on appointments for Bishops to take the place of Cardinal Burke which he held for a couple of years.
Yes, Cupich was a recommendation of Wuerl.
Read your Bible and CCC folks.
You will not get true teaching of the Faith from the wolves in sheep clothing that Jesus warned us about.
CCC: ” 2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized.
Here is the rest of it from CCC 2285 – Doctrine of the Faith.
CCC: ” 2285 Scandal takes on a particular gravity by reason of the authority of those who cause it or the weakness of those who are scandalized.
It prompted our Lord to utter this curse: “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”
Scandal is grave when given by those who by nature or office are obliged to teach and educate others.
Jesus reproaches the scribes and Pharisees on this account: he likens them to wolves in sheep’s clothing. “
Janek, You can probably rename the Catholic Church The HMS TITANIC, because She is headed for a terrible disaster, which probably, can not be avoided. Ave Maria Purrissima!
True St. Christopher Cupich is just another feminine bishop like many of our bishops no men in the USCCB to be found. Cupich is an avowed enemy of the TLM he is a full blown Novus Ordonarian.
A feminine bishop. And even if that were true, why is that a problem? Would you prefer biker bishops who show up to mass and ride up the aisle on their Harley’s?
Bishops and Priests are required to be men only. CCC 1577.
Also see related Biblical footnotes.
The issue with Cupich is that he does not adhere to the Doctrine of the Faith, and instead teaches the Faith according to Cupich.
Cupich stated his thrust is ILLEGAL immigration, not the Murder of approx. 1 MILLION innocent human beings through abortion each year in the USA.
Cupich loves the Democratic Party and Obama – and does not care so much about the 6 Intrinsic Evils.
“…A feminine bishop. And even if that were true, why is that a problem? Would you prefer biker bishops who show up to mass and ride up the aisle on their Harley’s?”
The misconception of clean equating to feminine and harleys relating to men is seemingly your problem, mous. True masculinity, especially in men, is not only a good thing, but necessary. That said, your post is disturbing.
HERE is US IMMIGRATION LAW –
” IMMIGRATION REFORM and CONTROL ACT of 1986 ”
The Act required employers to attest to their employees’ immigration status;
made it illegal to hire or recruit illegal immigrants knowingly;
legalized certain seasonal agricultural illegal immigrants,
and;
legalized illegal immigrants who entered the United States before January 1, 1982 and had resided there continuously with the penalty of a fine,
back taxes due, and admission of guilt;
candidates were required to prove that they were not guilty of crimes, that they were in the country before January 1, 1982, and that they possessed minimal knowledge about U.S. history, government, and the English language. ”
1) Enforce existing law.
2) Do not give ILLEGALs jobs.
3) Do not give ILLEGALs any government benefits of any kind.
Then they will stop trying to enter illegally.
Well because of their spending policies the
US FEDERAL GOVERNMENT is now over $18 TRILLION Dollars in debt as of yesterday.
Since OBAMA has been in office the national debt has grown 48%.
When are the Bishops going to teach about paying debts – COMMUTATIVE JUSTICE – “without which no other form of justice is possible” CCC 2411 ?
Because of National, State, and local government debts the USA is no long prosperous and can not afford ILLEGAL immigrants who do not pay their own way.
Andrew, you seem to have forgotten that George Bush was handed a budget surplus and a booming economy when he took office after Bill Clinton. By the time Bush left office, his tax and regulatory changes left the stock market tanking, housing prices plummetting and foreclosures at record high levels, and a budget deficit of about 10% of GDP. On the other hand, the deficit under Obama has shrank every year since he took office. This year it will be about 2% of GDP, less than all of Bush’s years in office except his first (which was essentially the last Clinton budget). https://politix.topix.com/story/7027-heres-the-deficit-under-clinton-bush-and-obama
YFC, it does not matter what happened in any former President’s term.
You point to former Presidents so that we will forgive the SINS of Obama?
OBAMA has to take responsibility for his own Administration – since January 20, 2009 – which will soon be 6 years. Why is this so hard for you to understand?
(And Obama did not have to deal with the NY 9/11 disaster or Katrina either.)
In ONLY 6 years OBAMA took this Country from $10 TRILLION in debt to the now over $18 TRILLION in debt.
OBAMA and you liberals have to own this debt.
Get OBAMA to:
stop wasting tax dollars,
stop growing the Federal Government,
stop importing ILLEGAL immigrants (by his non-enforcement of the law)who can not pay their own way,
and pay down the debt.
Or do you also oppose Doctrine of the Faith that requires payment of debt without which no other form of Justice is possible ?
CCC: ” 2411 Contracts are subject to commutative justice which regulates exchanges between persons and between institutions in accordance with a strict respect for their rights.
Commutative justice obliges strictly;
it requires safeguarding property rights, paying debts,
and fulfilling obligations freely contracted.
Without commutative justice, no other form of justice is possible.
One distinguishes commutative justice from legal justice which concerns what the citizen owes in fairness to the community,
and from distributive justice which regulates what the community owes its citizens in proportion to their contributions and needs. “
Bill Clinton merely went along with the REPUBLICAN Senate and House to get the Country out of debt.
That Congress deserves the credit, not Clinton.
So when are the Bishops going to teach Doctrine of the Faith – “COMMUTATIVE JUSTICE without which no other form of Justice is possible”
– CCC: # 2411 ???
In addition to the Federal DEBT of now $18+ TRILLION,
each person should check the debt clock for their own State.
CA DEBT is: $ 424+ BILLION.
NY DEBT is: $ 324+ BILLION.
Not to mention local government debts.
Governments must not spend more than their incomes, and not force new forms of spending requirements on the States.
People must not spend more than their incomes.
Bishops where are you?
Oh I forgot you are on the public dole as well – $36 MILLION annually to the USCCB’s CCHD, Catholic Charities, and CRS.
Get your hands out of the government till !
Jesus never told you to partner with any government.
Jesus never told you to add to the public debt.
– – – –
Btw Carolyn Woo head of the CRS (Catholic Relief Services) is annually compensated to almost half a MILLION dollars each year.
Jimmy Kimmel should do a bit with the bishops reading your mean comments.
“Anonymous” that is what all “Liberals” say — to all that disagree, they are “mean” or “uncharitable” or “non-loving” or some other idiocy. It is like speaking with spoiled children to try to seriously point out error to Liberals.
Jimmy Kimmel is a talented man. He would likely not find much humor in traitors destroying the Church that Christ gave His life to construct. Bet Bishop Vann spent a whole lot more time try to suck money to Protestantize Orange County Catholics, than he spent teaching his flock about the glorious history of the Church, its great sacraments, and the need to learn and pass on the Deposit of Faith. Come to think of it, he may not even know much about it (but the good bishop can really raise cash).