Msgr John Enzler - Making Allowances For Some Abortions?

Msgr John Enzler is CEO of Catholic Charities.  He's a former pastor of Blessed Sacrament parish in Washington DC (Chevy Chase neighborhood).  He writes regularly for Our Parish Times.

Unfortunately his leanings are quite progressive.  We've had occasion to comment on the evidence in the past.  In this latest issue of Our Parish Times he wrote a column entitled "Celebrating Life, Equality and Education".  Regrettably it is much worse than the usual progressive screed.  Please go to page 16 of that pdf.  In one paragraph he wrote glowingly of the March for Life.  However, he started the next paragraph by saying "I take a pastoral view of this issue".  Uh-oh!  There's that word "pastoral"!  We know now that it has ominous undertones, thanks to the way Pope Francis has used that word to camouflage all sorts of dissidence and heresy.  Msgr Enzler merely followed suit.  Here is the rest of Enzler's "pastoral view".  To wit: "Let’s start by admitting it’s wrong and admitting that abortion is in fact taking the life of an innocent baby. At the same time, let us as a Church be welcoming to all who may be considering or have had abortions. We don’t condone it, but we need to meet them where they are, recognizing that people are forced to make decisions in all kinds of circumstances. While we don’t agree with the decision, they still need to be welcomed and loved in our Church as part of God’s family."  Shall we unpack all this "pastoral" double-talk?

Let's do this "bullet style".

• The phrase "at the same time" sets the stage for the treatment of a pro-abortion mentality as being equivalent to reverence for life.
• "we don't condone it, but we need to meet them where they are"  It sounds nice, but "where they are" is literally hell-bound.  Where is the acknowledgment that the Church must immediately call such people away from abortion to immediate repentance?
• "people are forced to make decisions" Wrong.  No amount of "force" can ever justify a choice for an intrinsically grave evil such as abortion.  Enzler doesn't acknowledge that those "decisions" are impermissible.  What does that say about his own beliefs regarding abortion?
• "while we don't agree with the decision" It's not a mere difference of opinion.  Abortion is a mortal sin against God's commands.  Where is the truly pastoral concern?  Where are the Spiritual Works of Rebuking the Sinner, Instructing the Ignorant?
• "they still need to be welcomed" If one has committed the sin of abortion, they will find this welcome as they enter the confessional and confess this (and all other) mortal sin.  No other "welcome" will do.

If the topic of Enzler's article was "racism" as opposed to "abortion", would he be evincing such moral relativism?  Of course not!  But consider what was written of him in my previous posts.  We see that at the very best, he is less concerned about the murders of 3500 babies daily than he is about amnesty for border-crashers, etc.  Of course there are big bucks to be had from the latter.  The tiny babies?  Not so much!

I've been blogging on such mess for several years now.  Still I find it difficult to believe that a Catholic priest could vomit forth such pablum.  Consider that he's CEO of Catholic Charities.  Does he occupy this position despite his position - or because of it?  I suspect the latter.  This, and other problems with Catholic Charities, makes it an organization not worthy of one penny from faithful Catholics.

Catholic Charities CEO (And Other Social Justice Leaders) - Donating To Pro-Abortion Candidates

Let's look at Catholic Charities as a whole.  We see the majority of contributions going towards pro-abort candidates (there are a few pockets of sanity in that list).  Most notably, we see that Msgr John Enzler, president and CEO of Catholic Charities, gave $250 to pro-abortion John Delaney last November and Kathleen Matthews a few months prior.  In addition to being pro-abortion herself, Matthews is the wife of Chris Matthews.

There's more to this Enzler-Matthews situation than meets they eye.  Let me recall some history.  Msgr John Enzler was pastor of Blessed Sacrament in DC.  It sits on the south side of Western Avenue.  On the north side is Chevy Chase MD.  I think it was in the very early part of 2012 that he left Blessed Sacrament to take the reins of Catholic Charities.  In February, despite our many pleas, Chris Matthews did a book-signing at Blessed Sacrament.  The timing of the event was such that caused us to believe that the invitation to Matthews occurred while Enzler was still at Blessed Sacrament.  At any rate, we were there when Matthews appeared and we protested quite unmistakably.  See here for some reports on that.  So now we can see what appears to be a rather cozy relationship between the CEO of Catholic Charities and a prominent pro-abortion "katholyc" couple.

Looking at Just Faith, we see that the little that was contributed went to Barack Obama and John Kerry.  Put the word "Jesuit" in the employer box and you'll see that most of their recipients are pro-aborts, with a few pockets of sanity sprinkled throughout.

There are a number of people named "Charles Short" on this page, but the one of interest is in Rockville, MD.  Currently Special Assistant to the County Executive, he was a director of social concerns for the Archdiocese of Washington.  He recently gave money to pro-abortion Chris Van Hollen as the latter runs for the Senate seat being vacated by Barbara Mikulski.

Let's look at contributions from those who draw paychecks from Catholic University of America.  Stephen Schneck is the Director of the Institute for Policy And Catholic Studies at CUA - at least he was at one time.  In addition to his many other lapses of judgment, he has seen fit to donate solely to pro-abortion politicians.  Why on earth was he ever put in a position where he could corrupt young Catholic minds?

Until very recently, Barbara Early was an associate professor of social work at Catholic University of America.  As you can see at this link, she contributed a total of $1500 to Obama/Biden and four months ago to Clinton/Kaine.  Leah Wortham, a law professor, has contributed thousands to Obama/Biden throughout the years. Eric Jenkins, another professor, gave $2000 to John Kerry.

These people are so-called "movers and shakers" in the "social justice" crowd within the US hierarchy.  As we see where they literally put their money, we get a clear indication regarding their not-so-hidden socialistic and anti-God mindsets.  Their "social justice" is not Catholic by any stretch of the imagination.

Church Hierarchy Feeling Some Much-Needed Financial Pain

Please go to the website of Our Parish Times and examine the January 2020 edition.  On the front page, left side is an article by Msgr John Enz ler entitled "Is Our Anger Hurting Those Most In Need?"  As you read it, you'll see that it's not much more than a cheap attempt to lay guilt trips on faithful Catholics who are making their disappointment known in the only language the Church hierarchy understands - money.  Well, obviously we are having an impact in that area.  That is why we see this backlash from Ensler, who no doubt scribbled this screed at the behest of higher-ups in the Church. 

Not only does Enzler dance around the problems that we are addressing (other than token lip service), but he is actually downright dishonest about the use of our donations.  Nowhere in his diatribe do I see acknowledged the fact that a portion of our donations to our parishes is assessed by the Archdiocese and then paid to the chancery.  Moreover, as I noted last week, the Archdiocese in turn forks over a portion of those assessments to the USCCB.  In his article, Enzler quotes the late Tip O'Neill who said "all politics is local".  If that is the case, Msgr Enzler, why shouldn't donations stay local as well?

If the DC chancery is really concerned about the financial well-being of their parishes, they would announce ways that parishioners could donate without any money being siphoned up the chain of command.  Perhaps they might cease their own contributions to the USCCB.  Perhaps the bishops as a whole stop having their semi-annual meetings in swanky hotels; a retreat center would be more in conformity with their sacerdotal offices, anyway.

In the meantime, I would suggest that faithful Catholics do all they can to keep their money from funding corrupt chanceries and the USCCB.  Now we do have the precept of the Church that says we must support the work of the Church.  But it is not the work of the Church to shield predators from justice or to glom onto progressive causes as though they are equivalent to the salvation of souls.  There are traditional orders to be supported.  There are local charities and pro-life efforts that operate on shoe-string budgets.  There are local food banks and soup kitchens that need help.  Truth-telling Catholic sites such as LifeSiteNews and Lepanto Institute need assistance.  This is a non-exhaustive list of organizations that will put your donation dollars to worthy use.

Maybe Enzler might want to think of the real mission of the Church.  Then he might write of himself and his cronies, "Is Our Dereliction of Duty Condemning the Souls in Our Care to Hell?"

Catholic Charities CEO Botches Corporal Works Of Mercy

In the January 14th edition of the Catholic Standard, Msgr John Enzler (CEO of Catholic Charities of of the Archdiocese of Washington) had a piece entitled "Living The Works Of Mercy"; the online version is here.  It is ostensibly a "self-evaluation" to detail how he's implementing the Corporal Works of Mercy.  Something about the recitation of the Seven Corporal Works of Mercy struck me odd.  Therefore I looked up the Corporal Works of Mercy online; see here and here.

As I compared Enzler's list with the other two, I noticed a small but significant difference.  The work known as "shelter the homeless" was swapped for "welcome the stranger".  These two are not equivalent.  The second reveals the agenda of allowing indiscriminate immigration.  When one considers the millions of dollars that Catholic Charities has received from the federal government (which in turn are derived from our tax dollars), one can see that the CEO of a Catholic Charities office might - just might - have a vested interest in insinuating the idea into Catholic minds that the facilitation of indiscriminate amnesty is a teaching of the Catholic Church.  It's not - not by a long stretch.  I link now to a commentary on the thoughts of St Thomas Aquinas on immigration.  Bear in mind that this commentary does cite the appropriate passage in Summa Theologica.

I'm having trouble believing that this tweeking of the Seven Corporal Works of Mercy on the part of Enzler was inadvertent.  He did get all the others right, and they're even listed in the traditional order.  That the CEO of Catholic Charities would dare to misstate one of the Corporal Works of Mercy reeks to high heaven.  At least once a year there is an in-pew collection for Catholic Charities.  I haven't contributed in years due to its many shenanigans - this being merely the latest.

Catholic Charities Hosts Democrat Dog And Pony Show At St Jude's In Rockville MD

In 2018 all levels of Maryland public officials are up for elections: from the governor down to the local registrar of wills.  That of course means all the county councils and county executives are up.  This past Thursday evening on May 3rd, I attended a debate of candidates for the Montgomery County Executive position held at St. Jude's in Rockville.

I must remind one and all that Montgomery County Maryland is a liberal loony bin.  The lunacy was on display tonight in all its macabre glory.  First the debate was co-hosted by both Catholic Charities and the Justice and Advocacy Council.  I knew that when I got the notice and realized it was a harbinger of things to come.

The moderator of this debate was none other than Msgr John Enzler, who has been known to cozy up to pro-aborts and even to donate to their political campaigns.  There were seven candidates who were debating.  Six of them were Democrats; Robin Ficker was the lone Republican.  Three of those Democrats are current members of the County Council; they are George Leventhal, Roger Berliner, and Mark Elrich.  They were also on the council in early 2010 when the council passed its measure to hog-tie pro-life pregnancy centers in the County.  If you go back to my archives from that time, you can see video that I took of the hearings in Rockville.  Leventhal was particularly contemptuous of the pro-life people who testified against the bill.  It did pass, but went down in flames in court.  Mind you, all three of the current county executive candidates voted for it, although it was obviously unconstitutional.  You'll see later on how they hold the US Constitution in cheap regard.

The first part of the debate focused on "immigration": that is, when the Democrats weren't busy bashing President Trump.  Each of the Democrats loudly proclaimed that if they were elected, they would protect the border-crashers and that they'd direct the County police not to cooperate with ICE in any attempt to enforce immigration laws.  Let that sink in.  The President of the United States is constitutionally charged with ensuring national security; part and parcel of that task is the securing of the nation's borders.  We all listened to Democrats vowing to undermine the President as he carries out his constitutional responsibilities.  Whoever is elected to the executive position in November will take his or her own oath of office.  That oath includes the upholding of the Constitution.  But in loudly proclaiming that they would undermine the president, they just admitted that they would disregard their own oaths of office.  Moreover, in stating that they'd direct the county police to take a hostile stance towards ICE, they'd be directing those same officers to disregard their own oaths that they swore as police officers.  Isn't that, well, special??

Now of course Enzler was just beaming with joy upon hearing such talk.  Recall that Catholic Charities, along with other branches of the US church hierarchy, receive billions in federal dollars to "resettle immigrants".  Since that amount is predicated on headcounts "served", we can see how they'd be anxious to keep them crashing our national borders.

They moved beyond the Trump-bashing and shilling for border-crashers onto other favorite progressive topics.  As I said, there was one lone Republican - Robin Ficker.  When the candidates were asked about bringing jobs to Montgomery County, Ficker said he would brook no tax increases on his watch.  The others clearly didn't like that and used their time slots to take umbrage at that suggestion.  They also lauded the hike in the minimum wage.  Clearly we saw a shining example of how progressives simply aren't in touch with the real world.  Hikes in minimum wages - hikes in taxes - universal health care - these are all arbitrary costs that make Montgomery County unfriendly to employers - especially to those that are small businesses.  Anyone with a scintilla of common sense knows that, but liberals are devoid of even that.

Education was a hot button topic too.  The favored solution for the Democrats seemed to be expanding pre-k programs.  That's right.  They actually want to take the three-year-olds and start the brain-washing early.  Perhaps if schools concentrated on the basics instead of allowing and even mandating that the students "walk out" for some gun-control parade, the students might actually learn some useful skills.  Perhaps if little children weren't suspended because they pointed their fingers and made gun sounds, they might feel safe enough to learn.

Not every topic was covered.  They didn't touch their draconian attempt to gag crisis pregnancy centers by a long shot.  There was also no provision for the audience to ask questions.  Oh, we could write them down on cards and submit them, but they were screened.  Be certain that Catholic Charities would never allow their sugar-daddy puppet-masters to be embarrassed.

Below is a recording of the debate - unedited so that you can hear the socialistic prattle in all its ugliness.  Forgive the comments from me and my companions; I trust they don't muffle the nonsense from the stage.

Archbishop Gregory Honors Gay-Enabling Religious

Before we look at the main problem here, let's start with a general examination of the December 19th issue of the Catholic Sub-Standard.

In addition to the deficiencies observed by my blogging colleague A Washington DC
Catholic, others caught my eye.  On page 4 of the paper edition appears an article written by Msgr John Enzler entitled "Rejoicing in Jesus' Humble Birth"  In it the usual canards are to be found, particularly the one about Him being homeless.  Note to Msgr Enzler, the pope, etc: the Holy Family was not , repeat NOT, homeless.  They traveled to Bethlehem to register for tax purposes.  In fact, much of the population was traveling for the same reason.  That is why there was no room in the inns, for the rooms were occupied by fellow travelers.  So much for that politically-correct codswallop.

The other one, one that the progressives seem to think is obligatory to trot out, is that they were refugees.  Of course they are doing so to justify those crashing through our borders in disregard for legitiate immigration laws.  While they were indeed fleeing Herod at the direction of an angel, in no way did they flout immigration law.  Moreover, after a short while, they returned to their native place.

Another gaffe can be found on page 19 in the short blurbs of saints on the calendar for January.  I cannot find this on an online version.  Anyway, regarding St Raymond of Penafort, the Standard erroneously states that he was the second master general after St Dominic.  In fact, the second master general was Blessed Jordan of Saxony.  St Raymond was the third master general.  Might the ordinary lay person know that?  Most likely not.  However, one should be able to expect that the authors and editors of a Catholic publication would check these facts before publishing these kinds of bloopers.

But now for the real point of this post.  On page 20 of the paper edition, and here from the online edition, we read that Sr Mary Berchmans Hannan, former head of Georgetown Visitation, has been honored with a campus building named after her.  Archbishop Gregory attended the dedication and there was a big photo-op of the two of them.  The bloviation in her honor included snippets such as claiming that "everything she has done has been directed to honor God".  Oh really?   Let me jog some memories of events of this past May!   In brief, Sister announced that the alumni magazine would be polluted by the announcement of same-sex shack-ups.  Whatever the reasons, by praise of perversion she has embroiled the entire Visitation institution in mortal sin.  Some alumni did publish an open letter to protest Sister's horrendous decision.  However, one doesn't detect a peep of that mortal sin in the Standard's overly-glowy accolades for Berchmans.  She should have been tossed out on her ear after that stunt.  But of course our current prelate, friend of Fortunate Families, probably finds in her a kindred spirit - and it's not the Holy Spirit.

From The Et Tu Brute Department: Mark Shriver To Give Commencement Address At Mount St Mary's - Act Now To Stop This

In his book, Goodbye Good Men, Michael Rose extolled the seminary at the Mount as being one of the few decent ones that weren't overrun by gay pervert infestation.  Of course he wasn't speaking about the Mount at large, so maybe the seminary has been spared from participating in the immorality that must have underpinned this regrettable invitation.  Shriver will speak Saturday May 11 and receive an honorary doctorate of humane letters.  The abortion he advocates is anything but "humane".

As I look at the Board of Trustees, I see that Msgr John Enzler, of Catholic Charities notoriety, is on the board.  I perceive his paw-prints all over this invitation.

The Cardinal Newman Society has more information.  I've also posted on Shriver and the ridiculous pandering he's received from Churches and other Catholic organizations.  You'll also see in that anthology that faithful Catholics (including Yours Truly) have picketed him during some of those occasions.

Timothy Trainor, president of the university, can be contacted here.  Again, looking at the Board of Trustees, we see the name of Archbishop Lori on there.  Of course he'd be there, since the Mount is located within the Archdiocese of Baltimore.  It is worth noting that he attended seminary at the Mount.  He should also be contacted here.

We must ask them to withdraw the invitation to this pro-abortion person.  Else, they are flagrantly violating the directives set for in the USCCB's "Catholics In Political Life".  Will we picket this commencement?  The answer to that question is very much up to the Mount.

Also, please lodge your protests on the Mount's social media sites: Facebook and Twitter.

Climate-Change Hoax Perpetrators Revealing Their Anti-Life Motives

I was informed yesterday that my Catholic Media Coalition colleague, Stephanie Block wrote an article about a UK-based outfit called Catholic Climate Movement.  It caught my eye because a few days prior, on the aggregater site canon212.com, I saw articles in which the authors question the "morality" of having babies as the world deals with "global warming".  In this latter article, we see the anti-life underpinnings of the "climate warming" hysteria becoming more manifest; the protagonists aren't concealing it anymore - or at least not as much.

As Ms. Block says, this "Catholic climate movement" things makes reference to Laudato Si, a papal writing that is fraught with difficulties, not the least of which is the false legitimacy it lends to leading proponents of population control, such as Jeffrey Sachs and others.  I've written about these in the past.  To refresh your memories, I suggest you read these posts and the linked material, paying special attention to this expose that Michael Voris did several years ago regarding the "global warming" hoax.

In the past several years that I've been looking at these outfits, I've learned that much can be gleaned from these outfits by looking at their members, directors, and other resources, usually readily available on their sites.  This "Catholic climate movement" is no different.  Looking at their member organizations, we see quite a few of the "usual suspects":

• Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good
• Pax Christi
• Leadership Conference of Women Religious
• Franciscan Action Network - By the way, this November they are presenting a "Cardinal McCarrick award" to Karenna Gore, director of "Center for Earth Ethics".  They conveniently forget to mention that she is a daughter of Al Gore and most likely pro-abortion in her own right.
• Catholic Charities - Recall that its national CEO, Msgr John Enzler, donated to the the campaigns of two pro-abortion politicians.

That first organization, being a recipient of money from George Soros, makes me wonder how much Soros money is in this "Catholic climate movement" thing.  We know that Soros' money had a role in the murder of Terri Schiavo.

Take a look at these facts and understand how the "movers and shakers" of the climate-change hoax are playing the "social-justice" crowd for dupes.  Please warn your family, friends, etc not to swallow that kool-aid.  Ms. Block finishes her excellent article by stating that "you don't need to be Catholic to sign a climate petition".  I might have amended that to read "no real Catholic should sign this climate petition".

USCCB Ponders Canonical Penalties Against Defenders Of US Borders

Eeeekk!!  The USCCB is having their semi-annual meeting in Fort Lauderdale this week!  And they've already plopped a massive stinker!  This one centers around "immigration".  In other words, they are all for the coddling of those who crash our borders, entering illegally.  By definition, those who sneak into our country and break our laws are criminals.  But the bishops have historically been awarded millions of federal dollars throughout the years to "resettle" those who crash our borders.

They have their kindred progressive spirits in liberal areas of the country - Maryland being one of them.  In particular, Montgomery County is a liberal loony bin.  You might recall the debate among the candidates for County Council President.  I recorded that and posted the entire thing here.  Listen to these lemmings brag that they will order local police not to cooperate with ICE in the enforcement of federal immigration laws.  This debate happened in a Catholic church; Msgr Enzler (president of Catholic Charities, by the way - the same Catholic Charities that was the recipient of the aforementioned billions of our tax dollars) was just beaming at these arrogant pronouncements.

Yesterday the USCCB ranted against the Trump administration's moves to protect our borders.  They went so far as to say that this matter is a "right to life" issue.  Some bishops even suggested "canonical penalties" for those who implement the administration's new rules.  More on that in a moment.

Here's one gem of a paragraph:

Cardinal Joseph Tobin of Newark, N.J., proposed that a group of bishops be sent to the border to inspect the detention facilities where children are kept as a “sign of our pastoral concern and protest against the hardening of the American heart.” Bishop Oscar Cantú of Las Cruces, N.M., suggested “public gestures” such as prayer vigils in front of federal courthouses.

This is the same Cardinal Tobin who, as Archbishop of Indianapolis, turned a deaf ear to us when we pleaded with him to forbid lesbians from using a KofC hall to celebrate their fake "marriage".  In light of his subsequent receipt of his red zucchetto, I entertain the possibility that in fact he ordered that concession to the perverts.  Where was his "pastoral concern" when perverts and their enablers were allowed to flaunt their mortal sins on Catholic property?

Here's another:

Bishop Edward Weisenburger of Tucson, Ariz., made a bolder suggestion, raising the possibility of implementing canonical penalties for Catholics “who are involved in this,” referring to children being separated from their families at the border.Canonical penalties can range from denial of sacraments to excommunication, though Weisenburger did not specify what he intended beyond referring to sanctions that already exist for “life issues.”

Weisenburger was appointed Tuscon bishop by Pope Francis.  Certainly canon law is not one of his strong points for canonical penalties cannot be levied in the absence of canonical offenses.  Disagreeing with some clergy on matters of prudential judgment is not a canonical crime.  Bishops cannot wave the threat of "canonical penalties at their whims and fancies.  Sheesh!  Where's the "separation of church and state crowd" now?  Oh, that's right!  They only come out when non-negotiable matters of morality are the topics of interest.

Now here's an interesting question regarding canonical penalties.  We know that they are completely disregarded when pro-abortion politicians strut up the Communion line and receive, in direct violation of Canon 915.  So will all these prelates who thumb their noses at this unmistakable canon law now wax stern and forceful if Weisenburger has his way?

Speaking of "life issues", how much attention will baby-slaughter receive at this meeting?  Not much, but I digress.

Maryland bishops and their Annapolis cronies have been particularly hard at work to make Maryland a haven for illegals.  With these illegals have come hispanic gangs such as MS-13.  I link now to a video detailing how dangerous they have made it to attend public schools.  The Maryland bishops, to an uncomfortably large extent, are culpable for this state of affairs.

Catholic Charities In Texas Caught Facilitating Child Trafficking - Call To Action At End Of Post

On April 7, conservative pundit Alex Jones saw several small children being stuffed into a luggage compartment in a car in Texas.  The children were leaving a facility and were being prepared for smuggling to some seedy destination.

Jones placed himself in front of the vehicle, preventing it from driving away.  Meanwhile, his crew members sought out police attention.  Read more here.

Did you notice what the facility was, from which the children were being smuggled away?  Yes, it was a Catholic Charities office.  Are you shocked?  Don't be!  This sort of underhanded behavior is par for the course with them.  I've written much about their shenanigans throughout the years.  Their dirty deeds include:

• Taking one of their "clients" to an abortion appointment
• Coordinating needle-exchange arrangements for drug addicts.
• Their CEO Msgr John Enzler making political contributions to pro-abortion candidates
• And the list goes on

Those of us with long memories will recall how various Texas offices of Catholic Charities received millions of dollars in federal grants to "resettle refuges"; I suppose that also includes stuffing small children in a car trunk.  Whatever!  Gotta keep those dollars rolling in now, don't we?  More of their criminal actions can be found here.

The car trunk incident happened in Donna, Texas.  It appears to be in the Diocese of Brownsville Texas, headed by Bishop Daniel Flores.  I would hope that a criminal investigation is underway now regarding this office of Catholic Charities.  I believe child endangerment is a crime, is it not?  Anyway, one can see here the song and dance that the bishop is using to cajole his flock into submitting to an immorally tainted vaccine.  I am willing to bet no social distancing happened in that car trunk.

Contact Bishop Flores' office.  Let him know that you are outraged that a Catholic organization in his diocese is maltreating children in such an inhumane fashion.  They are in damage-control mode and have a "communications person" assigned to this.  I suspect we will have to call often; let's melt their phone lines and fill their email in-boxes.  Please let us all know the results of your conversation in the com box at the end of this post.

Maryland Catholic Conference Implicated In "Catholic Spring" Scandal?

A friend of mine sent to me this link from the Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.  He was rightly intrigued by the direct reference to the Maryland Catholic Conference (along with individuals skulking the corridors of the Archdioceses of Washington and Baltimore), named on this WikiLeak-provided email from Christopher Hale (with John Podesta receiving a copy).

I decided to do some net-surfing regarding leadership at the MCC, starting with the Administrative Board.  From the Archdiocese of Baltimore we have Steve Kearney.  He's also on the Board of Directors of Maryvale, a Catholic girls' school in Lutherville MD,  On that list he is identified as being owner of Kearney O'Doherty Public Affairs, LLC.  Looking on the FEC website, we see some rather telling political contributions from this owner of Kearney O'Doherty.  Every one of them is for a pro-abortion candidate.  Consider the Kratovil ones.  In those races, Kratovil was running against the Catholic pro-life Andy Harris; in other words, Kearney was contributing towards the defeat of a pro-life Catholic.  In this link we see that Kearney is identified as a "spokesman for the Archdiocese of Baltimore".  So the Archdiocese of Baltimore had as a spokesman someone who donated to supporters of baby-murder!  Isn't that...special?  The MCC repeats that error by retaining Kearney as an advisor.

In the Archdiocese of Washington section, we see one Vincent Burke, an attorney in Bethesda.  He's contributed to Connie Morella.  Below him is an all-too-familiar name: Msgr Enzler.  He's been featured earlier in this blog.  James Soltesz' contributions, with a few exceptions, are towards pro-abortion candidates: Obama, Wyn, Shriver, Hoyer, Morella.

Bonnie Phipps is by herself in a section called "Catholic Hospitals Serving Maryland".  Phipps has contributed to Elijah Cummings, Frank Kratovil, Mikulski, Cardin.

Now I've written quite a bit about the Maryland Catholic Conference over the years.  Notwithstanding some token efforts of theirs regarding abortion, they spend inordinate amounts of time, energy and money promoting the progressive positions on:

• amnesty and benefits for border-crashing scofflaws 
• gun control
• capital punishment
• Running interference for the state legislature when they want to tax us to the whazoo.

So who are Christopher Hale's contacts within the MCC who are ready to do his bidding?  As we can see, there are several possibilities: of which we know.  We do know that as faithful Catholics, we must take anything coming from the MCC with copious grains of salt.

Catholic Standard Watch: Shilling For Democrats On The Sly

On page 5 of the Catholic Standard's October 17 issue, (here, in the online edition) we find a letter written by Cardinal Gregory that deals with the upcoming elections.  While there are truths to be found therein, we also are none too surprised to see "seamless-garment" (hereafter called "seamless garbage") nonsense embedded in it.

We are pleased that Gregory made mention of the need for Maryland citizens to cast a "no" vote for Ballot Question 1, although his reasons are deficient.  We thnk that deficiency is by design.  He made no mention of the enshrining into the MD constitution the de facto disenfranchising of parental rights when it comes to making healthcare decisions for their children.  He made no mention that the proposed amendment would allow minor chidren to commence "sex changes" despite parental objections, nor even abut the fact that this amendment would pave the way for state-coerced abortions.  His omission of the gay-agenda aspects of this "reproductive freedom amendment" is highly suspect, and I will elaborate on that in this post.

Earlier in that same letter, Gregory said, "the Church does not tell you how to vote."  Oh, really?  Then what was the pastor and staff of St Thomas More doing in their distribution of Harris shirts, going so far as to announce it from the pulpit after a Sunday Mass?  I reported that a few weeks ago. 

Right after his remarks on Question 1 comes the seamless-garbage pabulum.  I quote "instead of a sole focus on access to abortion, it is necessary to advocate for comprehensive solutions.." etc.  

On page 3 of that same issue (here in the online edition), Cindy Wooden of the Catholic News Service (media outreach of the USCCB) seemed to offer some commentary on Gregory's letter, taking some liberties to embellish it a bit.  She quotes him as saying "that umbrella is wide enough to also include the dignity of people who are seeking entry into our country as immigrants."  That's odd!  I did word searches on Gregory's letter and did not find the words "immigrant" or "umbrella" therein!  Hmm!  For that matter, he didn't mention "capital punishment" either.  At best, this is sloppy journalism.  But what can one expect from the USCCB?

A few paragraphs up, I said that I'd elaborate on the complete lack of mention the gay-pandering aspects of the proposed MD amendment on the part of the MD bishops.  I shall now do so.  Please refer to my first linked article about St Thomas More.  Embedded in that post is a memo to the MD priests issued by Jenny Kraska, Executive Director for the Maryland Conference of Catholic Bishops.  Among other things, Kraska ordered the priests not to use materials produced by Health Not Harm MD.  Here is HNH's website.  Please peruse it.  You will see that their treatment of the amendment is far more comprehensive than that of the MCC.  Furthermore, they urge good people to educate their fellow citizens about the amendment, whereas there is no encouragement of outreach in the MCC's site.  Now why, oh why, does the MCC omit any mention of the gay agenda behind the proposed "Reproductive Freedom Amendment "?

Consider the previous actions of both Cardinal Gregory and Archbishop Lori regarding gay infestation in the Church.  In August, dissident gay-pandering Father James Martin SJ held a gay-gab-fest at Georgetown University.  Cardinal Gregory offered a Mass that was part of this debacle.  The Standard actually published Gregory's screed homily.  As you can see, this blather would have done the Washington Blade proud.

A few months prior to that, I attended the annual Archdiocese of Baltimore Social Ministry Convocation.  I detailed my experience in three posts between April and May of this year.  Chief among the delightful (?) presentations was the spectacle of Catholics being lectured to by a practicing gay dude.  One of Baltimore's auxiliary bishops was there at the close.  This debacle happened under the auspices of the Archdiocese of Baltimore Office of Life, Justice and Peace (what a mouthful!).  Its director, Erin Younkins, was in attendance and had been part of the planning committee, as she had done in previous years.  Archbishop Lori knew what was going to happen and allowed it.

The escapades described in the preceding two paragraphs are just the latest.  It doesn't take too much intellectual strain to understand why the Maryland bishops are loathe to oppose their gay-agenda pals, even if it means soft-pedalling the fight against the amendment and allowing abortion the mutilation of minors to be enshrined in the Maryland Constitution.

Not to be outdone, Msgr John Enzler, Catholic Charities affiliate, penned an article on page 6 of that same issue, and here in the online edition.  The poor guy is confused, you see?  He states, "navigating the party platforms and candidate's stances on various issues like immigration, abortion, death penalty and more can become quite confusing and contradictory."  Notice that abortion is just another issue, not treated as the deliberate act of murder that it is.  Also notice that we don't even see abortion listed as the first issue.  But consider that this is coming from someone whose political priorities are terribly askew from Catholic morality, as evidenced here.  Later on, he says, "my guiding principle when voting is to consider what would Jesus say, and what would He want me to do?...It doesn't mean that everyone will come to the same conclusion."  Full stop!  Yes, it does, unless we are to hold the blasphemous belief that Jesus has a split-personality disorder.  But that's the kind of nonsense uttered by someone who supports pro-abortion candidates over pro-life candidates.  With this kind of nonsensical thinking, Cathollics of weak minds, and very likely weak morals, could feel themselves quite assured as they cast votes for Kamala Harris.

I humbly present (again) factors for consideration when casting your votes.