Comments

  1. Reese is correct. It’s a whole lot easier to preach & whine & cuss about this one child-separation gig…
    … than to evolve some cajones, step up and publicly preach about Congress needing to quickly close those wide-open political loopholes. Specific loopholes that have now piled up and created a wide-open southern border. Why the silence on that?

  2. The bishops were not so shy back in 2016 when they stated in no uncertain terms from their pulpits that it would be immoral for a Catholic to vote for any politician who was insufficiently “pro-life.” Back then everyone knew exactly what that meant: vote for Donald Trump. Naturally they could not come right out and say that because that would have meant possible loss of their tax-exempt status, a big no-no if ever there were one. Now, when there’s a real humanitarian crisis on the southern border (note: not the northern border where all the white people live) in which real live human beings are being treated like animals. the bishops are not making bold statements from their pulpits to denounce this inhumanity to man. I guess they’re all too afraid to offend their big contributors. Le plus ca change…

  3. We might have hoped for Catholic leaders and Protestant leaders to encourage their voters toward human rights, truth in education, environmental concerns, and economic fairness—–in 2016 when it mattered. Maybe some did. Most apparently fell for Republicanism as usual, on the same old abortion and hate-the-gays hooks which GOP fishermen have been catching them on for several decades. Don’t expect much change now, even if we DO have a sensible pope in Francis and we DON’T have a sensible president in Trump. Most of the people in religion are going to continue with their regular blind rationalizations. But, but, but abortion. But, but, but religious freedom to diss people.

    Having lived from the mid-twentieth century to present, it is unbelievably disappointing to me that religion has devolved to lying about nearly everything. But the majority of it has. Whether it’s Judaism, Christianity or Islam, when it leans “conservative”, it departs from the objective truth on nearly all subjects. In Russia, it elects Putinism. In America, it elects Trumpism.

    Since this article is about Catholics, we should at least compliment them on not being quite (quite) as crazy in this regard as Evangelical Protestants.
    But don’t expect many of the Bishops to speak leftish. Most of them will likely still be on the rightish fence.

  4. “They fear ‘scandalizing’ the faithful by exposing their disagreements.”

    The last time the bishops’ strategy was to avoid scandal the Church ended up with the abuse cover-up. That worked well.

  5. “The bishops need to not only teach, but to show the country what it means to learn through open dialogue and debate.”

    I agree. But then the bishops need to create the possibility within the Church for such open dialogue and debate. They don’t really want that. Actual debate within the Church would include their listening to real Catholics telling them about the real lives of married couples who make decisions on contraceptives, telling them about the loved ones in their families and among their friends who are gay and happily married to a beloved spouse. Listening would mean they had to recognize that they do not have the power they want to pretend they have. They want to stand on a podium and pontificate about “all Catholics believe….” when they simply do not speak for all Catholics.

    But they do influence enough, even those who are not Catholic. One of the things I think is true is that the Catholic Bishops Conference played a role in getting Trump elected. They were so focused on their narrow issues of abortion, so-called “religious freedom”, and gay marriage that some of them and even more priests made it very clear that those were the only issues on which to base a voting decision. Well, a whole lot of people followed their advice, they played a part in building the coalition that supported Trump and Trump is what we got. They chose and all their complaining now does not excuse their complicity in bringing on the nightmare we are now living in.

    Yeah. Politics is complicated. But do you or do the bishops really think things are going to get better if the Republicans keep control of the House and/or Senate? Now it is children held hostage – and they still cannot utterly condemn him. He lies, distorts the truth, incites racism, xenophobia, violence. What we have is at least in part a result of their behavior in the last election. And they still think all they need is a little tweak here or there. Wow! This will be remembered.

  6. The good bishops should leave their cushy rectories and spend some time with those who patrol the border. Let them see first hand what lawlessness looks like and the human consequences.

  7. Yes. The nice words mean nothing when they’re not matched by action.

    Someone had to create the moral and pastoral situation that led six in ten — 60 percent! — of white U.S. Catholics to set all of this into motion through their votes in 2016.

    Someone has been responsible for the moral and pastoral leadership that could result in such a decision on the part of a majority of white Catholics claiming that they were voting “pro-life” as they set all this into motion.

    Who is that someone, bishops?

    And when you have had this dismal effect on your flock, on those in your flock who have the most resources and institutional clout, how can you expect us to listen seriously and respectfully now — now that the grim effects you have produced by your lack of sound moral and pastoral leadership are producing such a bitter harvest in American democracy?

  8. When the parents are felons what happens to the children? Tough call!

  9. 1. Not the U.S. bishops nor the pope have ever denounced Trump by name.
    2. See above article on United Methodist condemning Sessions.
    3..Earlier this year, Christian (non-Catholic) and Jewish leaders were arrested for protesting Trump’s immigration policies.
    4. Other Christian churches and synagogues have offered their properties as sanctuaries.

  10. Catholics, and everyone else, in 2016 were faced with the quadrennial choice of the lesser of two evils.

    Given Hillary Clinton’s track record an argument can be made that their choice was the lesser of the two.

    Blaming the Catholic bishops for the Democrats’ self-destructive tendencies seems more than a little misguided.

  11. “Open dialogue and debate” is inconsistent with the nature of that denomination, which is clearly and unabashedly hierarchical.

    It would appear they “pontificate” on what “all Catholics should believe” rather than on what “all Catholics believe”, the relevance of which in context is nebulous.

    Giving the Catholic Bishops Conference a role in getting Trump elected simultaneously gives it credit for being listened to, which they are not, and distracts from the major problem: the Democrats nominated someone that at least half the population absolutely hated.

  12. The Catholic bishops by the nature of the beliefs of that church and their vows have no choice but to contest abortion and certain other things which are considered intrinsically evil.

    There was a long string of discussions in the late and unlamented National Catholic Register comments sections about bishops or priests of that denomination stating “in no uncertain terms from their pulpits that it would be immoral for a
    Catholic to vote for any politician who was insufficiently ‘pro-life'”, and all that could be offered in the way of evidence was a single priest, and that priest got thoroughly chastised by his bishop.

    I suppose things may appear otherwise from a vantage point in the Episcopal Church, but your analysis of this church appears to be wide of the mark.

  13. Since there was no coordinated “strategy” but individual bishops acting contrary to their own church’s Canon Law, your comments are quite unfounded.

  14. Dear Bishops,

    Yesterday, a high-profile Catholic, Corey Lewandowski — he managed the campaign of the man now occupying the White House — mocked a Down syndrome child taken from its mother by the current administration, which was elected by the votes of more than half of U.S. white Christians, who claimed they were voting “pro-life” as they cast their votes. Shamefully, six in ten — 6 in 10! — white Catholics voted for the man now occupying the White House, claiming that they were voting “pro-life” and setting into motion the horrors we’re now witnessing. As you remained totally silent, as a body…. Complicitly silent, signaling your own wish to have the current “pro-life” administration empowered and not one led by Mrs. Clinton….

    Corey Lewandowski is a Catholic with a very high profile. His cruel mockery of a Down syndrome child is now being seen on video disseminated around the world. Anyone who knows that Lewandowski is Catholic will — rightly? — assume that he represents “Catholic values” and speaks and acts on behalf of “Catholic teaching.”

    This week, 640 United Methodist clergy and laypeople have called for disciplinary action against Methodist Sunday School teacher Jefferson Beauregard Sessions, who is one of the architects of the policy by which 66 children per day are being separated from their parents, with toddlers — toddlers and babies! — placed inside “tender-age” concentration camps. The UMC letter calling for disciplinary action against Mr. Sessions states that he is violating United Methodist teaching and should be publicly called to accountability by his church.

    You yourselves, dear bishops, have not hesitated to engage in public disciplining and rebuking of Catholics who, in your view, fail to represent “pro-life” or other Catholic teachings adequately. You’ve called for books written by theologians, including several American nuns, to be censured, and you’ve called for theologians to be silenced. Some of you have announced that you would refuse communion to Catholic political leaders supporting a pro-choice stance. You did this with the apparent blessing of the Vatican.

    Some of you have not hesitated to use the sacraments as a political weapon, a means of controlling lay Catholics to force them to violate their consciences and do your bidding.

    Will there be any disciplinary action against the high-profile Catholic political figure Mr. Lewandowski for publicly mocking a child with Down syndrome taken from his mother? Or will you allow this abominable behavior captured on video footage that has gone around the world now to represent Catholic “pro-life” values — and will you sit by in silence, reserving your wrath for nuns writing theological books of which you disapprove?

    What, precisely, is “pro-life” about the program of removing children from their parents’ arms and locking them in cages in concentration camps that Mr. Lewandowski is defending, dear bishops? Is it possible that your moral and pastoral leadership, which lies behind the choice of 6 in 10 white Catholics to set all of this into motion while claiming “pro-life” motivation, has been an abysmal failure, leading to behavior that is precisely the opposite of pro-life behavior on the part of those who claim the “pro-life” banner.

    These questions surely must be asked now.

  15. 1. Not the U.S. bishops nor the pope have ever denounced any American candidate or President by name.

    2. The United Methodists condemning Sessions are doing so as individuals, not as the United Methodist Church.

    3..Other Christian leaders are free to do as they wish. Three of the major denominations involved in the protests have lost half their memberships in the last four decades, which seems to indicate folks want their politics and their religion served separately.

    4. As a result of the sorts of complaining one can read on this very article, and as a result of the Johnson Amendment, the Catholic bishops – wisely IMHO – have avoided politicizing their premises and properties.

  16. Yes, I think everyone understands you have issues with the Catholic Church.

    In any case, “Some of you have not hesitated to use the sacraments as a political weapon, a means of controlling lay Catholics to force them to violate their consciences and do your bidding.” appears to be completely unsupported.

  17. These bishops should focus on improving life in Central America where their church has had sway for 500 years over the political, economic and cultural elite. They should ask themselves why are so many people leaving Catholic countries for the US. Do they want to lift up their falling numbers here? It would be cheap to help people to stay in Central America.

  18. 1. When Notre Dame invited Obama to give the commencement address, “more than 80 American bishops” denounced him by name. https://www.catholicculture.org/commentary/articles.cfm?id=321 llinois Bishop Daniel R. Jenky compared Obama to Hitler and Stalin. https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/Peoria-Bishop-Compares-Obama-to-Stalin-Hitler-148099495.html
    “Cardinal George doesn’t pull punches in this remarkable video addressing Obama’s “despotic” tactics.” https://catholiccitizens.org/views/49816/cardinal-george-attacks-despotic-tactics-of-obama-denying-conscience-protection-to-healthcare-workers/ This is only a few of dozens of attacks on Obama, by name, from the U.S. episcopate.
    2. Sorry my typo in omitting the “s”. It should be “United Methodists including clergy.”
    3. “The largest decline among major religious groups” has occurred in the Catholic Church according to an PRRI survey. “Nearly one-third (31.2%) of Americans report being raised in a Catholic household, but only about one in five (20.9%) Americans identify as Catholic currently.”https://www.prri.org/research/prri-rns-poll-nones-atheist-leaving-religion/
    “The greatest net losses [in the number of Americans claiming a religious affiliation] by far, have been experienced by Catholics. Nearly one-third of American adults (31.7%) say they were raised Catholic. Among that group, fully 41% no longer identify with Catholicism. This means that 12.9% of American adults are former Catholics.” http://www.pewforum.org/2015/05/12/chapter-3-demographic-profiles-of-religious-groups/

  19. 1. 80 American bishops pointed out that he represented positions and actions – including supporting abortion and compelling religious organizations to violate their beliefs – which appeared to be incompatible with honors from a “Catholic” university.

    They were silent about voting for or against him.

    2. What it was not was the United Methodist Church. I can find groups of Catholics behind a variety of positions, some quite zany.

    3. https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/prri-releases-largest-survey-of-american-religious-and-denominational-identity-ever-conducted-300514391.html

    It is certainly no shock that the PRRI “results” always seem to confirm the personal positions of the folks who run it, for example Robert P. Jones, PRRI CEO and author of “The End of White Christian America”.

  20. It is probably more likely that, given two choices, the party whose platform includes:

    https://www.democrats.org/party-platform#reproductive-health

    “We believe that reproductive health is core to women’s, men’s, and young people’s health and wellbeing. We will continue to stand up to Republican efforts to defund Planned Parenthood health centers, which provide critical health services to millions of people. We will continue to oppose – and seek to overturn – federal and state laws and policies that impede a woman’s access to abortion, including by repealing the Hyde Amendment.”

    is not going to get much traction with Christians, Muslims, or Jews who have not apostatized.

  21. Thank you, Mr. “Arnzen,” so much — for affirming that you agree with the U.S. Catholic bishops when they state (in Father Reese’s summary):

    The bishops have said they are “disheartened,” “deeply troubled,” “deeply concerned” and “disappointed” by the president’s actions on immigration and refugees. They worried about “bigotry,” “fear and intolerance.” The president’s actions were “alarming,” “devastating” and “injurious.” He was putting people “in harm’s way” and making “migrants, especially vulnerable women and children, more susceptible to traffickers and smugglers.” They protested the president’s executive order that “virtually shuts down the refugee admissions program,” which affected resettlement programs run by the church.

    The president’s policies, they complained, “needlessly separate families, upend peaceful communities, endanger the lives and safety of the most vulnerable among us, break down the trust that currently exists between many police departments and immigrant communities, and sow great fear in those communities.”

    It’s refreshing to hear you voicing such full-throated support for Catholic teaching.

    You do agree with the bishops’ teaching about these matters, don’t you, Mr. “Arnzen”? Since you’re a faithful Catholic, but I’m not? Right? That’s the point you’re making with your comment: you agree with anything the magisterium teaches, but I don’t.

    So glad to hear you are “deeply concerned” about the “bigotry,” “fear and intolerance,” “alarming,” “devastating,” and “injurious” policies now being followed by this administration, which “needlessly separate families, upend peaceful communities, endanger the lives and safety of the most vulnerable among us, break down the trust that currently exists between many police departments and immigrant communities, and sow great fear in those communities.”

    It’s refreshing to hear you say this. I hadn’t been clear before now that this is where you stand.

  22. Bishops acted in conformance with Church law and the requirements of the papal secret. If there were no single document laying out how to deal with child sex abuse, we can see there was a consistent pattern in the response of bishops world-wide. That is the culture, the hierarchical/clerical culture that will sell out children to protect the “good” name of priests and bishops. JPII was absolutely ineffective in dealing with it; BXVI only slightly better. Francis may, finally, be recognizing that it is the culture within the Church of protecting the “insiders”, primarily those ordained but also quite a few who belong to religious orders. I don’t think Francis will do much, but he will do more than the pathetic nothing to next to nothing done by his two predecessors.

    I suggest you read the common threads that run through investigations done in England, Ireland, Canada, the U.S., Australia – to see how the consistent problem within the Catholic Church is cultural. I admit that it is also a typical response of other organizations, religious and non-religious, to protect the organization even at the cost of leaving a pedophile undisclosed so he can harm again. But that it is also a typical, uniform response of the Roman Catholic Church makes the Roman Catholic Church no better than any of the others. What would Jesus?

  23. The Roman Catholic biships shouldn’t be in the business of doing either. They should be in the business of preaching, teaching and modeling the Gospel of Jesus Christ, staying out of the Sacristy with their acolytes and leaving their clothes on them!

  24. So by all means they should stop lobbying against gay rights, abortion rights, and public education. They should stick to teaching the Gospel and leave those matters to the world of mundane political leaders.

    But what will the Republican party do without them?

  25. If being a Christian, Muslim or Jew carries an obligation to lie about health care, human rights, economics, environment and education then they should all apostatize.

  26. “In truth, is not a robust but respectful debate exactly what the church and the country need today?”

    In the country, perhaps not, and in the church – no.

    For the Catholic bishops a focus on transmitting the faith trumps a porridge of dubious social commentaries.

    The first is their mission as bishops, the second intrudes on the laity’s role in rendering prudential judgments in areas where they have expertise and the bishops do not.

    The track record for churches who feel obliged to check all the boxes on every social and political issue facing the membership has been two fold: people leave since they can get politicized elsewhere; no one listens as the commentaries pile up in volumes.

  27. I think what you mean is “(i)f being a Christian, Muslim or Jew means they will disagree with me on health care, human rights, economics, environment and education then they should all apostatize.”

    Lots of Christians, Muslims, and Jews do not see things your way, and you’ve never presented a convincing argument that they should.

  28. If they continue doing what you’re suggesting they should be doing, the UMC should at least change their name and register as a political organization, to be governed by those rules, instead of still claiming to be mainly a religious organization and misappropriating the offerings they receive from their attendees.

    I’m a non-affiliated voter, so I don’t really care what the Democrat or Republican parties do or don’t do. I expect a good many Methodists are Republican, and they can do whatever their consciences dictate.

    BTW, when has the UMC EVER lobbied for the non-political good of public education, except to be allowed to indoctrinate students with their biases about racial descrimination, gay rights, abortion rights, etc.? I used to make my living in public education as a teacher and principal, and it’s not any church’s business to try and be the conscience of a captive audience like public school students are. That’s the task of their parents and places of worship!

  29. “It is ironic that the bishops — who think of themselves as teachers — have an easier time reaching agreement on their opposition to, or support of, specific government programs than in agreeing on a teaching document for their people.”

    Actually, no, it’s not. After almost 50 years the truth of Humanae Vitae has not be taught by the Bishops, in that and now a great many things…. they choose not to Teach.

  30. Any bishop who did not dismiss from the ministry a cleric who was found to have been involved in abuse was in direct violation of Canon Law.

    Those dioceses which followed Canon Law had no lawsuits and few offenses, and those offenders were removed forthwith. That precludes the notion “there was a consistent pattern in the response of bishops world-wide”. Had they all followed Canon Law, there would been a consistent pattern.

    You’ve brought up the non-existent “papal secret” in the past. It does not exist in the form you believe it does, and it played no role in the events which followed the abuse.

  31. “If they continue doing what you’re suggesting they should be doing, the
    UMC should at least change their name and register as a political
    organization, to be governed by those rules, instead of still claiming
    to be mainly a religious organization and misappropriating the offerings
    they receive from their attendees.”

    And…? I was in agreement with your statement. But if you were being honest, you would have to accept my response as part of the same policy.

    If a church uses its resources and manpower to campaign for political candidates and issues, it deserves to be treated like a PAC, regardless of the sect.

    No disagreement there.

    “except to be allowed to indoctrinate students with their biases about racial descrimination, gay rights, abortion rights, etc.?”

    A thoroughly canned and indoctrinated statement concerning public education. I guess civil liberties, honesty, and a free democratic society are at odds with your view of religion and education. How sad. Public education is both a right and a necessity for a democratic society.

    You have internalized bigotry and revisionism as your religious belief as well.Oh well.

  32. Indeed, the bishops voiced a lot of the usual high-minded rhetoric sans content for which they are becoming rather notorious.

    “It’s refreshing to hear you voicing such full-throated support for Catholic teaching.”

    Unless they put it to a vote of the entire episcopal conference, and it received a 2/3 affirmative vote, it is not Catholic teaching. It may be consistent with Catholic teaching, or it may not be.

    “Since you’re a faithful Catholic, but I’m not? Right? That’s the point you’re making with your comment: you agree with anything the magisterium teaches, but I don’t.”

    Well, that wasn’t my point.

    If it’s your point, I’ll have to point out that I am not a “faithful Catholic”.

    I do note from your posts here and elsewhere that you have several areas of disagreement with the Catholic Church: abortion, same sex behavior, contraception, and a number of others where that church has taken non-negotiable positions and bound Catholics to them in conscience. I would therefore tend to agree with you that you are not a faithful Catholic.

    In fact, you seem outright cranky with that church.

  33. This was NOT a “thoroughly canned and indoctrinated statement concerning public education.” Spuddle-in-your-pants. It was rather impromptu. Civil liberties, honesty and a free democratic society are already taught and encouraged in civics, American history and government courses in public schools–NOT any canned and indoctrinated statement at all, but one that’s well known and verified by anyone who has attended a public school.

    There are no “internalized bigotry and revisionism of my religious beliefs here. Just the truth as best that I can tell it to the readers here.

    BTW, what are YOUR “internalized bigotry and revisionism of religious beliefs, if you’d care to share those with us. I think we can pretty-well tell from your words here, which are purely conjecture, and totally WRONG!

  34. If a church uses its resources and manpower to campaign for political candidates and issues, it is exercising its constitutional rights, and if the government attempts to treat it like a PAC, it should fight it all the way to the Supreme Court.

    Public education is a relatively modern innovation in American history.

  35. How very odd that you never ever complain about religious leaders meddling in politics who are black, Democrats, or agree with you – or any combination thereof.

  36. “Civil liberties, honesty and a free democratic society are already taught and encouraged in civics, American history and government courses in public schools–NOT any canned and indoctrinated statement at all, but one that’s well known and verified by anyone who has attended a public school.”

    You appear to be unable to tell the difference between the two. But you are contradicting yourself. First you lamented public schools were indoctrinating children. Now you are denying it. Make up your mind, please.

    “Just the truth as best that I can tell it to the readers here.”

    One that seems at odds with teaching about civil rights apparently! How very selective.

    Unless I completely misread you and you were not claiming public schools are indoctrinating children.

  37. Enough of this stupid drizzle, you Stooge!

    Teachers just make the relevant reading assignments, then emphasize the most important material in their classroom presentations and discussion. It’s up to the individual students and their families–often immigrants with a profound appreciation of what liberty and freedom of religion and/or political pressures they experienced in the country they came here from.

    Wise up, or SHUT UP! The intelligent readers on here have a pretty good idea of where you’re coming from when you simply do all this nitt-picking of others’ contributions without having anything POSITIVE or ENLIGHTENING to say yourself!

  38. You are being very unclear and contradictory here. Are public schools indoctrinating children here or not?

    You brought it up in such a fashion.

  39. When you start with “I think what you mean is”, you are being a problem person again. Go away.

  40. They will make sure whit Catholics vote for Republican candidates, no matter how morally obnoxious their poiicies and their hints or outright signs of racism. Complaining without action is just PR.

  41. And you have no issue with Lewandowski?

  42. Second thing first: no.

    First thing second: unless you have some reasonable argument that would convince a Christian, Muslim or Jew – and to this point you have not presented one – all you can offer is what you happen to like or dislike.

  43. The Catholic doctrine of Natural law obliges the church to impose its moral rulings on people of all faith and and none, and on all governments.

  44. If I do, I’ll bring it up with Corey Lewandowski directly rather than use it as an entré to a long-winded diatribe directed at the Catholic bishops, the main point of which was “Some of you have not hesitated to use the sacraments as a political weapon, a means of controlling lay Catholics to force them to violate their consciences and do your bidding.”, which btw is not true.

  45. The parents of these children have committed no crime if they asked for asylum. Asking for asylum is not a crime. If they crossed the border without legal documentaion, the they committed a misdemeanor. A misdemeanor does not allow for the barbarity of how they are being punished, including imposing trauma with long range mental health consequences on their children. What the US is doing is a crime against humanity, something far more grievous than a misdemenaor. Of course you may prefer to break US law by treating a misdemeanor as a felony and worse

  46. Asking for asylum at the border is not a crime.

    Entering the country illegally is a crime, and then asking for asylum doesn’t erase the offense.

    If they are released in this country with their children, they disappear.

    If they are taken to the border and released, they have to re-navigate their way back to Central America (the Mexicans are not kindly disposed to them) or try another run through the desert with the risks that entails.

    There is NO barbarity involved.

  47. So, CitizenWay, what part of SHOULDN’T don’t you understand??

  48. Christians really are the worst people on the planet.

  49. When the parents are felons (e.g. illegal aliens) what happens to the children? Tough call! And I don’t see any answers to this situation in the diatribes below.

  50. No one can convince you of anything, Bob. With your stated refusal to stop stalking me here with harassment after being asked today (and on multiple other occasions), I am both blocking you and flagging you. RNS can decide whether it wishes to continue tolerating your style of bombarding people for sport. I have decided to never see another word you write. I also flagged my own comment here as explanation.

  51. No one can convince you of anything, FriendlyGoat.

    I have flagged your post because you persist in calling posting in compliance with the rules of both Disqus and Religion News “stalking”.

    “Targeted harassment — posted or encouraged others to post harassing comments or hate speech targeting me, other individuals, or groups”

    This is not your personal private email system.

  52. No point in continuing providing more facts that will be ignored.

  53. No point in presenting “facts” twisted beyond recognition, e.g. decrying Notre Dame’s inappropriate honoring of a neo-pagan = a political statement in the context of elections.

    You really won’t be happy unless and until the American Catholic bishops check with you personally before taking any action.

  54. You really won’t be happy unless and until the American public check with you personally before taking any action. #ThatsSoChristian

  55. “Open dialogue and debate” is inconsistent with the nature of Christianity, which is clearly and unabashedly hierarchical and patriarchal. Case in point: you.

  56. Bob is a serial harasser on this and other forums. #ThatsSoChristian

  57. You seem outright cranky with reality. This is why your religion is going the way of the dinosaur. Good riddance.

  58. What are these bishops doing to stop the need to leave Catholic Central America to go to the United States? The Catholic church has been at the core of economic, political and cultural power in Central America for 500 years. Why are these Latin American societies now so poor, corrupt, violent and backward? The Roman Church needs to focus its efforts where it can get more bang for the buck down there. Or do these American bishops really want to replenish their vacant pews in the US? Given its history since establishment under Constantine, one has to always take what these people of the Roman Church says with a grain of salt versus their real motive.

    Real asylum seekers need to present themselves at the entry points and follow the process. I do agree that the kids and parents should not be separated whether they are asylum seekers or just illegal aliens and economic migrants. Of course, why are these central Americans escaping hometown violence not given asylum in Mexico?

  59. First, many of the parents are seeking asylum. Seeking asylum is not a crime and is covered as legal under US law. Second, those who cross the border without documentation are committing a misdemeanor, not a felony. The vicious punishment for a non–crime or a misdemeanor is horrible. The punishment would be horrible even if thet were committing a felony, which they are not.

  60. The parents are not felons. Asking for asylum is legal under US law. Crossing the border without documentation is a misdemeanor.

  61. Which Canon Law? Canon Law required bishops to give priests a chance to reform, to change, to see the error of their ways. There are also several instances of bishops who tried to dismiss priests for sexual abuse who were thwarted by the Vatican.

    I suggest you read Potiphar’s Wife. Or read any number of articles/books by Sipes. Or read the reports from the Irish investigations and read the transcripts and results from the Australian investigation. As for “those dioceses which followed Canon Law” there appears to have been so few they hardly can count as any kind of norm within the Catholic church. If Canon Law was so clear, why were most bishops so unaware of what it required of them.

    Come on, Bob. Canon Law was and is a mess when it comes to the Church dealing with sex abuse where a priest was involved. There were previous settlements with those abused by McCarrick but he was still galavanting around the world on behalf of popes and the Vatican – what was the response of the Vatican to reports of this? Nothing? Looks like it.

  62. Here is a layperson’s description of the relevant Canon Law:

    http://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2013/05/02/canon-law-and-false-abuse-allegations/

    and if you have access to the right library, here are some reference materials on the very same section of the Law:

    http://www.canonlaw.info/codexvivens1-7.htm#BOOK_IV

    The 1917 Code was even stricter than the 1983 Code.

    As the author, Canon lawyer Cathy Caridi, notes there was a tightening on April 30, 2001, by John Paul II with

    http://w2.vatican.va/content/john-paul-ii/en/motu_proprio/documents/hf_jp-ii_motu-proprio_20020110_sacramentorum-sanctitatis-tutela.html

    “Norms on More Grave Delicts Reserved to the Congregation For the Doctrine of the Faith”

    which required that ALL cases of abuse be reported to the Congregation For the Doctrine of the Faith because of reports of just what I mentioned, bishops taking it upon themselves to “do their own thing” in contravention of Canon Law.

    Attorney Caridi provides additional information in a second part to the above article:

    http://canonlawmadeeasy.com/2013/05/16/canon-law-and-false-abuse-allegations-part-ii/

    I notice you provide no documentation of any kind for “There are also several instances of bishops who tried to dismiss priests for sexual abuse who were thwarted by the Vatican.”

    So, bishops were not unaware of what was required. For a number of reasons some of them failed to do what was required. Given over 5,000 bishops some failures are unfortunately to be expected.

    The fact that some of them, for example Rembert Weakland in Milwaukee, were practicing homosexuals or kept mistresses may have had something to do with it.

    In the U.S.A. the rise of Mind Mavens and the siren call of psycho-wonderfulness clearly had something to do with it.

    Perhaps bishops who spent too much time reading the National Catholic Reporter lost their bearings.

    In any case, this illustrates yet another reason why you may encounter problems establishing dialogue with bishops. To do so you first need to know the facts and what you’re talking about.

  63. The asylum seekers would not be felons in the USA because they are not citizens but they are possible felons in their home country and many lie about it on their asylum forms. Solution, detention camps for all asylum seekers including their children until there is proof that the form facts are true. Even then there is just so much room in the USA. Time to send the Marines back to Panama et. al to clean up the mess???

    And keep the following in mind:

    “Regardless of their immigration status, noncitizens who have been convicted of an “aggravated felony” are prohibited from receiving most forms of relief that would spare them from deportation, including asylum, and from being readmitted to theUnited States at any time in the future.Dec 16, 2016

    Aggravated Felonies: An Overview | American Immigration Council

    https://www.americanimmigrationcouncil.org/research/aggravated-felonies-overview

  64. Says the guy who believes that a virgin gave birth. What do Christians know about facts?

  65. Don’t hey have the right to express their opinions and push their agendas (within the law, of course) the same as anyone else even if this goals are toxic to some of us?

  66. They have that right.

    But If they are going to attack churches as being PACs for speaking their mind against the government and its policies, one should be consistent in doing so and apply it to all denominations and political affiliations, or not make the attack at all.

    In this case the people most likely telling certain churches to be quiet in criticizing the government are the ones most likely to demand their own church has a say in it.

  67. I blocked him. I cannot read the product of an infected mind.

Leave a Comment