USCCB Political Videos Downplaying Abortion To Promote Seamless Garment And Undermine Trump

I post their series of videos below.  While the videos mention innocent unborn as needing protection, they don't say from what they need protection.  That is, of course, abortion, and the progressive politicians shilling for abortion.  Why?  Two reasons.

1. Many of these politicians have been funnelling money towards the USCCB coffers.
2. They know that many faithful Catholics will vote for Trump on account of his recent actions to stem abortion.  The USCCB is set on undermining him.  If they can downplay abortion in the minds of Catholics, they'll lessen the impetus to vote for Trump.

Along the lines of that second point, notice how the unborn is just one of a whole laundry list of issues, most of lesser importance and tending to justify a socialist government, ultimately leading to a one-world government.  LifeSiteNews and Church Militant have commentary, too.

As an aside, notice at the 5-minute mark the shameless plug for the many-times-disgraced Catholic Relief Services.  This video series, and the larger effort of the USCCB's is just another reason why we should cease all contributions.

From The Et Tu Brute Department: Rob Schenck Goes Full-Bore Pro-Abort

What else can his position be called when his published words include, "What is pro-life about forcing the birth of a child, if that child will enter a world of rejection, deprivation (etc)"?  The entire screed can be found in this New York Times op-ed piece that he penned.  Of course the NYT  published it with joy - the same kind of "joy" that Caiaphas experienced when Judas betrayed Our Lord to him.  Forcing the birth of a child?  So the preferred alternative, according to him, is to allow the murder of that same child?  Apparently so.

While this saddens me greatly, it does not surprise me in the least.  Last August he was making pro-abortion noises.  He also had been making other liberal/progressive noises in regards to gun control, amnesty for border-crashers, etc.  His posts on facebook have focused more on these progressive pet causes than baby-slaughter.  These positions have as common factors the absolving of crime perpetrators of any moral responsibility for their crimes.  Perhaps therein lies some cause for his fuzzy thinking on baby-slaughter.  He is not the only one in whom I've noticed this phenomenon.

Let's return now to Schenck's announcement of his betrayal.  Many prolifers have been giving him well-deserved rebukes.  Ryan Bomberger, founder of the Radiance Foundation, is a pro-life leader who was himself conceived in rape.  He penned an open letter to Schenck that is well worth the time to study it.  In it is truth that Schenck (and any other "woke" people enamored/seduced by "social justice" clap-trap) would do well to take to heart.

I myself might suggest that he read Ezekiel 18:24 and take warning and repent while he can.  In the meantime we shall all pray for that repentance, and for wisdom and humility so that we too don't fall into those sins.

Subtle Heresies In Hymns At Mass

That is what I encountered last weekend at the 11:15 Mass at St John Neumann in Gaithersburg.  It was one phrase in the Offertory hymn that was so problematic as to be heretical.  I find that often happens in songs with a "social justice" theme.

The hymn was When Jesus Came Preaching by Fred Pratt Green, a now-deceased Methodist minister in England.  Here's the embedded heresy: "so let none of us swerve from our mission to serve that has made us his church from the start".  That phrase displays a totally inverted and perverted view of the Church.  I'll contrast this with some facts from the Baltimore Catechism, facts that I learned in the first grade.  I'll list questions 136-138.

• 136 What is the Church?  The Church is the congregation of all baptized persons united in the same true faith, the same sacrifice, and the same sacraments, under the authority of the Sovereign Pontiff and the bishops in communion with him.
• 137 Who founded the Church? Jesus Christ founded the Church.
• 138 Why did Jesus Christ found the Church?  Jesus Christ founded the Church to bring all men to eternal salvation.

According to Green, this "mission to serve" caused the church to come into being.  For him, the question isn't even who spawned the Church but what.  In his thinking, Jesus Christ Himself has been substituted by this "mission to serve" as originator of the Church.  This is de facto idolatry.  I'm sure that was not the intention of any of St John's music minstry to promulgate heresy and idolatry, but nonetheless that is in fact what happened, with many decent Catholics in the pews singing this right along, not realizing until too late what was happening (assuming they were alert enough to sense a problem).

Additionally, this "mission to serve" is never quite defined.  Since we did have a guest priest who spoke on behalf of a charity to serve the third-world impovershed (and it sounds like a very good organization), I venture a guess that this song was picked with "social justice" in mind.   Question 138 states quite plainly God's intention for the Church: to facilitate eternal salvation, that is, to save people from hell and get them into heaven.  Any charitable endeavor, important though it is, is ancillary to the salvation of immortal souls.

Too many are losing sight of the primacy of eternal salvation.  Indeed, far too many don't believe in hell and don't seem to care that one unconfessed mortal sin at the time of death will result in eternal damnation.  Jesus spoke about hell many times during His earthly ministry, yet today we rarely (if ever) hear the word "hell" mentioned from the pulpit.  This constitutes a gross disservice to the wayward Catholic in the pew, who will never benefit from the warning to avail him/herself of Confession.  Now that is a true "social injustice", one that will have everlasting consequences.

At any rate, I'd suggest that when we arrive at Mass and are waiting for it to begin, that we give the hymns a glace to make sure that we won't be singing something that doesn't conform to Church Teaching..

The USCCB's Corrosive And Deadly "Social Justice" Teachings With Their Poster Boy John Sweeney

Yesterday John Zmirak published an article called "The Myth Of Catholic Social Teaching".  I commend it to your reading.  He basically states that the Magisterium speaks infallibly on matters of faith and morals.  Some issues such as abortion and contraception involve the direct commission of mortal sin.  Those are intrinsic evils; no amount of debate is permissible.  We do not commit murder - period.

There is also the matter of care for the poor.  That is a charge laid upon us.  However, good people can disagree as to the best methods to implement such care.  Sometimes it's clear that those in high places of the Church are exercising faulty logic in their approaches to matters such as alleviating poverty, etc.  In those circumstances, we are not obliged to give obedience to those directives as they do not carry magisterial weight.  Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI said so himself when he attempted to have a letter delivered to a US bishops' meeting.  It said - in part - "not all moral issues have the same moral weight as abortion and euthanasia. For example, if a Catholic were to be at odds with the Holy Father on the application of capital punishment or on the decision to wage war, he would not for that reason be considered unworthy to present himself to receive Holy Communion."

It is becoming all too clear that the USCCB advocates progressive positions on matters such as illegal immigration, self-defense rights, and even the atrocities being committed by Muslims in the Middle East.  I blogged on the muslim matter last week, chiding the USCCB for urging more useless "dialogue" with thugs.  I've no doubt that the USCCB dismisses my words.  Sadly, they probably also dismiss the words of Archbishop Emil Nona, the Chaldean Archbishop of Mosul.  He and four other Mosul bishops have been driven from their dioceses, along with countless thousands of their flocks.  He warns that what we see there could well be a harbinger of things to come in the western world - that means us, folks!  I will quote the archbishops's own words: "Your liberal and democratic principles are worth nothing here. You must consider again our reality in the Middle East, because you are welcoming in your countries an ever growing number of Muslims. Also you are in danger. You must take strong and courageous decisions, even at the cost of contradicting your principles.  You think all men are equal, but that is not true: Islam does not say that all men are equal. Your values are not their values.  If you do not understand this soon enough, you will become the victims of the enemy you have welcomed in your home."  King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia has issued his own, very similar warning.

I think there are two things Archbishop Nona is trying to say.  First, the US bishops must stop their simpering and groveling pleas for "dialogue".  They are an abysmal waste of time at best and at worst, they serve to distract us when we should be preparing for real action to protect our families and our very culture.

Second, we must stop "welcoming them in our homes".  That means we must stop the floods of immigrants that pour across our borders.  Make no mistake about it; the bulk of illegals are young men, not helpless little waifs.  How many of these young men are muslim terrorists?  We don't know because there is no effective screening of those who cross the Rio Grande.  But again, we hear the USCCB telling us to "welcome the stranger".  Never mind that these "strangers" may well be murderers awaiting their orders from their muslim commanders.  By the way - there are reports that ISIS groups are in Mexico, planning an attack on the US with car bombs and the such.  USCCB, shall we "welcome those strangers"?

A gentleman named John Snyder posted an article on Crossmap a few days ago, taking the USCCB to task for their stance on gun control, given the threats of terrorism that are looming in the United States.  I quote one salient statement:  "USCCB should terminate its disgraceful support for the criminalization of private handgun possession. Such criminalization would eliminate the ability of law-abiding citizens to defend themselves from criminals, including terrorists.  Catholic clergy should abandon pacifism and see reality for what it is. People need guns for protection. As Christ Our Lord proclaimed, 'The man without a sword must sell his cloak and buy one,' according to Luke 22:36"  Hear!  Hear!

So why, oh why, does the USCCB insist on parroting the Obamanista's talking points on illegal immigration, muslims and gun control?  In a word, follow the money, for the USCCB certainly does.  I wrote an article for Defend Life recently (look on page 7 of this link), detailing the obvious links between the USCCB shilling for porous borders and allowance of everyone crossing the Rio Grande.  The money trail was so blatant; they aren't even trying to hide it.

There you have it.  One consequence of the USCCB's wrong-headed stances on these issues will most likely be an increase of murders, if not outright terrorism - both because they favor unfettered admission through our borders AND the removal of our ability to defend ourselves and our loved ones.

"But that's merely conjecture!" some might say.  Fair enough, but it's reasonable to believe this to be a very solid probability.  AND we have evidence of current corrosion of faith and morals by USCCB-esque social teaching.  That evidence comes from the mouth of the corrosion victim himself - John Sweeney!

John Sweeney
Thank USCCB social teaching for this!

Sweeney was recently honored by the AFL-CIO for his union work.  The erstwhile head of both the AFL-CIO and SEIU, at that award function, credited "Catholic social teaching" for giving him the impetus for his work.  I've detailed a lot of his work here and here.  The second link details the two occasions in which I led pickets of Sweeney public events.  I know I gave you a lot to read, so I'll close with a picture showing the beneficial impact of "USCCB social teaching" on John Sweeney.

Recall what Pope Emeritus Benedict XVI said - there are areas regarding prudential judgment in which we can disagree with Church leaders.  Many times, particularly with the USCCB, we must oppose them outright.