More Banalizing Of Lent In The Archdiocese Of Washington - This Time Over Guns

In today's bulletin from St. John Neumann in Gaithersburg, MD, page 4 bottom-left, we see an advertisement for a "Lenten Gun Violence Prevention program".  It's supposed to be held at St. Francis of Assisi church on Thursday April 3rd.  Oddly enough, I do not see it on St Francis' online bulletin (as of this afternoon).

This has all the hallmarks of being a push for gun control under sanctimonious trappings.  Let's visit "Heeding God's Call" website, shall we?   Here we have their "litany of commitment".  After a bunch of yammer that purportedly mourns the victims of violence and sympathizes with their families, we get into the meat of the thing.
Leader: Now is the time to end the senseless killing of our boys and our girls, our men and
our women.
People: Now is the time.
Leader: Now is the time to cease the profligate sale of assault weapons and all multiple
firing guns, weapons meant only for murder

Where, oh where, do we read in this lovely litany about appropriate punishments for those who engage in violence, regardless of tools used?  How about, "Now is the time to sentence violent criminals to life with hard labor and without parole and perks?"  Did I just overlook that part?

On page 6 of this document, this "covenant of commitment", they lament the culture they lament the "unrestricted proliferation of guns in our communities".  Under what rocks have they been hiding for the past few decades?  Gun control and regulations have burgeoned, making onerous the purchase of firearms for good citizens.  Moving on down, they lament the eight children killed every day (supposedly) by guns.  Nary a peep is said about the thirty-four hundred children murdered by abortion daily.  There is a key cause of other manners of violence.  That has led to a coarsening of morality, a devaluation of life in the minds of too many.

Lisa Delity of Heeding God's Call will be one of those leading the event at St. Francis of Assisi.   In 1994 she lost a brother, Michael Miller (FBI agent) to a murderer wielding a gun.  The write-up for Mr. Miller is found on the FBI page.  It states that the man who murdered him and other law enforcement officers, Bennie Lee Lawson, was already a suspect in a triple murder.  Why was he not behind bars?  Might that lack of detainment have been part of the problem?  So he got a gun.  Here's a news flash for bleeding hearts everywhere.  Criminals break laws - even (surprise!) gun control laws!  Lawson himself died during that 1994 shootout.

Delity, in 2008, issued a statement lamenting gun violence - and capital punishment.  I'm sure the irony escapes her.  At any rate, Lawson is not going to be able to murder any more people.  It already sounds like he had six to his charge - and no "gun registration" would have stopped that.

Rabbi Sue Levi Ewell is on Heeding's Coordinating Committee.  She's also an unabashed lesbian.  Then there's Rabbi Linda Holtzman (part of Heeding's Executive Committee), who is/was a member of something called Rabbis for Obama.  These two gals certainly aren't "heeding God's call" when it comes to His Laws on marriage, sexuality and life.  Their moral credibility is zilch.  And they help lead a group that pontificates about guns?  These "rabbis" are two reasons why "Heeding God's Call" will not be taken seriously by faithful Catholics.

Then there's Bishop Kermit Newkirk.  One of his other hats is that of leader of Philadelphians Organized to Witness, Empower and Rebuild (POWER).  That bunch is a branch of the Alinskyian PICO network.  We knew we'd find at least one of these "community-organizing" types lurking around.  Another "Heeding" director, Bishop Dwayne Royster, is also with POWER.

They also have a penchant for having "prayer vigils" outside of gun shops.  That's like having "prayer vigils" outside of car dealerships to curb deaths by reckless driving.  Such tactics do nothing to address the real issue - the violent criminals who use guns and any other weapon to wreck violence.  They insist on dancing around that "elephant in the living room" called the revolving prison door.  By the way - I wonder how many of them have "prayer vigils" outside of abortion mills, where real murder occurs?  Don't worry!  I won't hold my breath waiting for an answer.

Any organizations that allows lesbians, obamaphiles and Alinskyian devotees into its leadership ranks has nothing to contribute to any Catholic's faith and morals.  When Catholic "social justice" groups give them an audience, they lend credibility to the groups' dissidents and deviants.  That is unacceptable.

More Progressive Hacks Trying To Dilute The Meaning Of Being Pro-Life

First, let's deal with Mark Shea (the patheos blogger) and the issue of gun control.  From what I understand, he seems to think that all pro-life people must support gun locks, "smart technology", etc to claim the moniker "pro-life".  This article from American Catholic links to Shea's patheos article about it.   Because the patheos bloggers are paid based on the number of hits their blogs get, I refuse to post to the patheos article directly.  I will, however, link to his Facebook posting.

Here he posts a Catholic News Service article that makes the ridiculous claim that the Catholic Church's position on individual gun ownership is that it should be banned.  The basis for that conclusion couldn't be too much more flimsy than it is.  The basis is a parenthetical remark in a footnote of the document entitled "Responsibility, Rehabilitation and Restoration: A Catholic Perspective on Crime and Criminal Justice".  Reminder - the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has no inherent teaching authority at canon law.  Certainly no one need take to heart some obscure little footnote in a document.

Now I'll quote from a less-obscure document - called the Catechism of the Catholic Church.  Obviously this does bear the weight of the teaching Magisterium.  I'll be quoting actual paragraphs as opposed to little footnotes: paragraphs 2263-2265 to be precise.

2263 The legitimate defense of persons and societies is not an exception to the prohibition against the murder of the innocent that constitutes intentional killing. "The act of self-defense can have a double effect: the preservation of one's own life; and the killing of the aggressor. . . . The one is intended, the other is not.
2264 Love toward oneself remains a fundamental principle of morality. Therefore it is legitimate to insist on respect for one's own right to life. Someone who defends his life is not guilty of murder even if he is forced to deal his aggressor a lethal blow: If a man in self-defense uses more than necessary violence, it will be unlawful: whereas if he repels force with moderation, his defense will be lawful. . . . Nor is it necessary for salvation that a man omit the act of moderate self-defense to avoid killing the other man, since one is bound to take more care of one's own life than of another's. 
2265 Legitimate defense can be not only a right but a grave duty for one who is responsible for the lives of others. The defense of the common good requires that an unjust aggressor be rendered unable to cause harm. For this reason, those who legitimately hold authority also have the right to use arms to repel aggressors against the civil community entrusted to their responsibility.

The right to self-defense by individuals is a necessary corollary to their inherent right to life.  For just as much as an individual has the right to obtain food, shelter, etc to maintain his/her life and that of his/her family's, he/she has the right and even solemn duty to protect him/herself and family from unjust aggression.  It stands to reason that this God-given right to self -defense also includes the right to have the means necessary to address threats as they present themselves in this 21st century.  Keeping paragraph 2265 in mind, please reread the American Catholic link and consider the predicament in which that young mother found herself.  Had she not had ready access to a gun, unencumbered by a "gun lock" or politically-correct clap-trap, she and her baby might well have been murder victims.

Now I may be just speculating, but I think I understand (in part) the motives of the USCCB for jumping on the progressive gun-control bandwagon.  Many programs of the USCCB, including CRS, are heavily funded by various governmental agencies.  They want to keep those funds flowing.  As far as Shea goes, who knows?  Knowing, however, that he (and other patheos bloggers) get paid based on their numbers of hits, I will not link directly to him.

But enough of gun control.  According to Bishop John Wester of the Diocese of Salt Lake (UT), no one can be called "pro-life" who opposes Medicaid expansion.  Of course, who would be funding this Medicaid expansion?  Find the nearest mirror and stare into it; there's your answer.

No one who calls themselves Catholic will deny their responsibility to come to the assistance of the needy.  The question is how best to do it; on that good people can disagree.  That is a matter of prudential judgment.  In other words, one can call themselves "pro-life" if they don't agree with the USCCB-like clamoring for more governmental encroachment.  Regarding abortion and other intrinsic evils such as contraception, no one can make allowances for them.  Certainly no one can be pro-life who accepts the usage of contraceptives and the such.

I and others must continue to call on the carpet those who attempt to use the term "pro-life" to sell their progressive positions.

Gun Control Is Dissent From Church Teaching

In the March/April 2013 issue of the Defend Life newsletter an article of mine appears on page 17 (note: below the jump break I'll reproduce the unedited article for therein are some links to referential material.)  The main thrust of the article is to outline why I strongly believe that the underlying philosophy behind the current push for "gun control" is actually anti-life.  Despite what the "seamless-garment" groupies incessantly chant, the movement to restrict access to the tools of self defense constitutes significant dissent from Catholic Church teaching.

I won't rehash my article; you can read it for yourselves.  I'll also put below the jump break a montage of clips where progressive (aka Democratic) politicians make no bones about their ambitions to make a mockery of our Second Amendment rights.

The Guns Of Lori

Showcasing once again that the Catholic hierarchy in the USA is, by and large, at the beck and call of their socialist puppet masters and sugar daddies, the Archdiocese of Baltimore spearheaded a gun buy-back session in Baltimore.   What?  They should be about the salvation of souls?  How rigid of you!  Didn't you read what the occupant of Peter's chair said last week?  Why, priests aren't supposed to "dogmatize", didn't you know?

Here is the article from the Catholic Review.  By their own admission, most of the docile dupes are middle-aged.  They probably aren't inclined to engage in drive-by shootings, etc.  One deluded guy said he suffered gunshot wounds as a victim of a car-jacking, but now that he's in a "better area", he didn't need his gun anymore.  He gave it away with no compensation.  Now just think.  If he had a gun at the time of the car-jacking, would he have been shot?  What makes him think that his "better area" won't go to seed?

Speaking of car-jacking, here's an account of an incident in North Carolina.  One woman had some road-rage lunatic follow her into a parking lot.  He tried to force her car door open.  Fortunately she was armed and shot her would-be assailant to death.  I'm sure she would not have been inclined to fall for that gun buy-back codswallop, and probably will never be so stupid.

Both of these articles came to me by way of Canon212.com.  Both that webmaster and I wonder just where did the Archdiocese of Baltimore get that $50k to fund that gun buy-back nonsense?  Inquiring minds would like to know.

Maryland Public Schools Terrorize Yet Another Play-Gun-Toting Youngster

The nitwits and progressives who run Maryland's public schools have just suspended their fifth child for toy-gun-related playfulness.  The Washington Post reports that this latest act of school-official-instigated nonsense occurred in Calvert County.  A five-year-old child showed another the cap gun.  The driver overhead it and that's when all hell broke loose.  Over-reaction is too kind a word for the behavior of those darlings of the NEA.

Ladies and gentlemen, if bringing a toy gun to school is against policy, fine.  Confiscate the gun for the day and let the little guy go about his school day.  But why, oh why, was a two-hour interrogation of a five-year old necessary?  Why did they not contact his parents immediately?  His parents have retained an attorney.

The little guy has been suspended for the rest of the year (unless intelligence makes a come-back very soon).  I have a better idea.  Instead of suspending the little boy, let's suspend the principal and the other school officials who seem to think that hysterical behavior is a necessary qualification for the brainwashing of children.

The Shooting In Sutherland Springs TX And The Liberals' Blood Guilt

At least two dozen people, many children, were slaughtered by a madman as they attended their church services in Sutherland Springs, TX.  We pray for the repose of their souls and peace for their families and friends.  This isn't the first such shooting and regrettably it won't be the last.

Even more regrettable is the immediate politicizing of this tragedy by the left.  Their rants must be answered, lest we allow them once again to seize control of national conversations and debate.  Immediately the yap and yammer sounded anew for more gun control, vilifying the National Rifle Association and the GOP in the process.  I suspect now that more details have come to light, the left might soon have to shut their mouths in embarrassment.  Or maybe they won't, arrogant lemmings that many of them are.

The now-dead assailant, Devin Patrick Kelley, was in the Air Force, but was court-martialed for assaulting his baby step-son, fracturing his skull.  He also harrassed numerous ex-girlfriends.  The Air Force gave him a "dishonorable discharge". Obviously already-existing gun laws should have prevented him from obtaining firearms.  However, the Air Force did not communicate the convictions to the NICS database.  So now it must be asked that if the federal government (and the military is part and parcel of that) is so negligent about this facet of the law, why, oh why, would we think additional laws will help?

But the godless left continue to chant their talking points.  Chelsea Handler (whoever she is) didn't wait one hour after the reports broke to blame Republicans for the shooting.  In her warped view, a Republican decided to shoot up a church whose congregation most likely leaned Republican.  The evidence on that page seems to indicate that the shooter had leftward leanings; he was atheist.  Showing that they share Kelley's atheistic world view, Democrats displayed their atheistic depravity for all to see; one Democrat legislator walked out when a moment of silence for the victims was called.

Of course now there's kvelling for more gun control.  Some even opine that the National Rifle Association has some blood-guilt for the massacre.  BUT - the facts contradict this implausible theory.  I think we can thank the internet for announcing these facts, because the lamebrain-mainstream media would not have done so on their own.

The Texas Rangers gave a press conference regarding the sequence of events.  According to them, Kelley's rampage was cut short when a neighbor grabbed his own AR rifle and shot Kelley.  He then fled and the man took up the chase.  This is why the Second Amendment exists.  Sunday's death toll might have been much higher if an armed citizen had not been able to intervene.  But there are more details.

The citizen's name is Stephen Willeford and (liberals, please be seated and have smelling salts ready) he is a former NRA instructor and Christian to boot!  OK!  So an atheistic leftist, dishonorably discharged from the military shoots up a Christian church and is stopped by an armed Christian man.  Perhaps this is why Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton poo-poos the idea of more gun control and instead advocates for more armed law-abiding citizens.

Now I bet some of my readers are wondering what this has to do with Catholicism and being faithful to the Teachings of Christ.  Simply this.  I've no doubt that some leftist bishops are going to sniff about the "need" to confiscate weapons.  Should they do so, they'll be engaging in blatant deception, just as their democrat "sugar daddies" and "puppet masters" are doing.  Yesterday Ted Cruz revealed how Democrats filibustered legislation that he authored, legislation that would have prevented Kelley, an already-convicted felon, from buying guns.  That fact will be conveniently ignored as they seek to hinder our rights to self-defense - the same rights that allowed Stephen Willeford to stop Devin Patrick Kelley.  To the extent that they've already succeeded in some localities, it is they who have blood on their hands - and that includes the gun-control freaks who are to be found among the nation's bishops.

Here are two different takes on whether or not church attendees should be armed.  See here and here.  Under no circumstances should churches forbid legal carrying in their buildings.  In doing so, they are leaving their congregations vulnerable.

Kumbaya To Archbishop Gregory

Note: the following is a parody - a work of fiction - that I'm using to illustrate a point that I'll explain at the end.  Please let no progressives pop a gasket when reading this.  Now let us begin..

In some seedy neighborhood within the Archdiocese of Atlanta, a group of thugs/terrorists/whatever were plotting to wreck mayhem by shooting up some Catholic Church within that archdiocese during a Sunday Mass.  They had just finalized their dastardly scheme when one of them glanced at a newspaper lying on a table.  He beheld the news that Archbishop Gregory has declared that Catholic property will remain "gun-free" in the wake of Georgia's law making it easier for licensed gun owners to take guns into venues previously prohibited.

With grave concern, he pointed this out to his accomplices in crime.  "We cannot do this!", he exclaimed.  "Our guns simply aren't permitted on Church property!  That's what the archbishop just said!"  His companions nodded in agreement and laid their shoot-em-up scheme aside.  Thus the archbishop saved the day!  Hip-hip, hooray!

End of parody

Ladies and gentlemen, must I spell out how ridiculous the story is?  It's ridiculous for the same exact reasons as is the Archbishop's insistence on "gun-free" churches.  Of course the Archbishop is within his right to govern what happens on Church property.  But does he really think any malevolent individual will give a rat's rump about his desire for a "gun-free" Church?  The only ones who will honor his request will be those who might have stopped a terrorist but who would be reduced to becoming the victims of terrorists.

Such is the convoluted thinking of progressives - lots of "kumbayas" and wishful, unrealistic thinking.

Kiddie-Gun Paranoia Worsens

This latest has occurred in Nebraska, and this time the little would-be terrorist is 3 years old.  He's totally deaf and has to sign his name.  However, his school doesn't like his name-sign, the one taught to him by his parents from day one.  Apparently the ninnies who run that school think it looks too much like a gun so they want him to change his name-sign.  His parents are standing up to the real bullies and have made this national news.  You can see the interview here.

Here's some common-sense education for those who think they're qualified to teach our children.  Now read carefully, boys and girls (or whatever gender you call yourselves)!  Here are some basic facts.

• Human fingers are not firearms.
• Pop-Tarts and other breakfast pastries are not firearms.
• Little children saying "pow, pow" is not a deadly weapon being discharged.
• Hello Kitty bubble blowers are not firearms.
• The little toy soldier plastic guns, no bigger than an adult fingernail, are not firearms.
• A drawing of a gun is not an actual gun.

And now, dear children (that is, the overgrown brats who inhabit the NEA and chapters, school administrations and school boards), do we understand these basic facts of reality?  You probably do, but are ever so zealous to brainwash and traumatize our children into being obedient and docile sheeple who are always beholden to the statists and progressives.

Father Pfleger Goes Ballistic On The Rittenhouse Verdict

As most know, Kyle Rittenhouse has been found "not guilty" on all five counts brought against him.  We can dispense with whether or not a 17-year old should have been in that situation.  The fact is that he was and his life was threatened; at least that's what I would call it if people pointed a gun at me and were beating my head with a skateboard.  What was he to do?  Just suffer it in silence?  He had no choice but to defend himself.

Well, Father Michael Pfleger got his panties in a wad over it.  "A travesty" is what he calls Rittenhouse's acquittal.  But you see, Pflegar really, really hates guns.  In fact, he hates them so much that he took issue with a Chicago gun owner, stating that he (Pfleger) would "sufff" the gun owner.  My post on the matter, complete with the clip where Pfleger uttered his charming screed, is here.  

So on one hand a court of law recognizes that a young man defended himself from otherwise-certain murder.  On the other hand, a Catholic priest threatens the life of a gun owner.  Which one of these is the real travesty?

Woe To You That Call Evil Good, And Good Evil

That passage from Isaiah 5:20 is a strong admonition to left-leaning Catholics who have joined the progressive clarion call to fight all kinds of what they consider to be "social injustices" that may not be unjust at all.  The measure of what is good or evil, just or unjust is to be found in the Church's teaching traditions of the past two centuries, as opposed to popular fads that are spewing forth from dissident Catholic quarters.

Let's look at immigration, since these left-wing quarters, from the top down (that means you, USCCB) are having hissy fits about President Trump's ongoing efforts to expel foreign invaders.  The left-wing, clergy included, refuse to acknowledge that our concerns lie not with those who immigrate in conformity with our applicable laws, but with those who flout our laws and sneak inside the US.  They are, by definition, criminals.  They are breaking US law that does comply with Catholic moral theology.  In obfuscating that important distinction, they commit serious sins against the Eighth Commandment.  I've written a bit on this topic over the years; here's a collection of it.  So in this case, what's being called "evil" is the responsible regulating of immigration and what's being called "good" is the direct disobedience of immigration laws and being accessories to these crimes.

Let's move to another darling cause of the progressives - gun control.  The left is all gung-ho on this bugaboo, not addressing the fact that criminals, by definition, disobey laws.   The only ones impacted would be law-abiding citizens who desire to own firearms for the protection of themselves and their families.  Whenever a shooting happens, immediately the left starts kveling about the need for firearm restriction - never the apprehension of criminals.  Would that impinge too greatly on the Democratic voting base?  Look at England.  They've essentially outlawed guns, so what happens? Knife attacks arise - surprise!  The "geniuses" governing England are now into (wait for it!) knife-control!  Same thing in Red China!

Again, I've written a bit about that.  See here.  Please note that the top post explains why I believe that the USCCB's stance on gun control runs counter to Catholic moral theology.  Once upon a time I believed that this was an area in which good people could disagree.  I no longer hold onto that delusion.  The right to adequate self defense is a moral good that no one may call evil, on pain of sin.  A former pro-life leader, Rob Schenck, has glommed onto the erroneous push for arms banning, and in the process has allowed his thinking on basic pro-life issues to become corrupted.  I'll have more to say on that later.

Let's move on to the death penalty or capital punishment.  If gun control is an attack on the good of self-defense, the push to eliminate the death penalty is an attack on the good of civil government protecting its citizens from violent criminals.  Again, the USCCB and their dutiful puppets are lock-step with their Soros-esque sugar-daddies in their shielding of criminals from the death penalty.  Again, I've written much on that and won't rehash everything, but will elaborate on one major point.  In the past, all the popes have upheld the legitimacy and the good of capital punishment.  The most recent catechism from Pope John Paul II does the same.  However, last year Pope Francis annnounced his intention to rewrite the catechism to say that the death penalty is inadmissable.  I said it then, I'll say it now; THIS IS HERESY.   Of course the USCCB intends to happily comply in promulgating this heresy.  So now the good of capital punishment has been called evil, and this error has reached the proportions of full-blown heresy.

The USCCB, their obedient state-wide counterparts and the rest of their lapdogs are fully engaged in calling good "evil", and evil "good".  They have jettisoned all authentic moral bearing for the favors of money, power, and worldly prestige.  In so doing they have allowed their own thinking to become clouded, as have those who unthinkingly swallow the progressive bile simply because it comes from men wearing miters.

However, there have been pro-life leaders who, themselves succumbing to the siren calls of emotion-based leftwing sentiments, have allowed their pro-life beliefs to become weak and uncertain.  In other words, by assuming progressive positions on immigration, gun control, etc, they have assumed progressive positions in pro-life matters as well.  I have already mentioned Rob Schenck a few paragraphs back.  He now supports the legalized murder of children.  Another former pro-life leader, John Cavanaugh-O'Keefe, became so enamored of progressivism that he cast his vote for the rabidly pro-abortion Hillary Clinton in 2016.  Both of these men clearly called evil "good".

Ladies and gentlemen, liberalism is harmful to the soul and can impede eternal salvation.

Cardinal McCarrick Embarrasses Yet Again

Yesterday at the Washington National Cathedral Cardinal McCarrick joined with leaders of other faiths to "call for an end to gun violence".  Let's review the definition of "violence" from the viewpoint of Catholic morality, shall we?  Violence is defined as the "unjustified use of force".   So we can infer that while all violence involves the use of force, not all usage of force is violence for there are cases when use of force is justified, e.g., self-defense, law enforcement, etc.

During the meeting, the Very Reverend Gary Hall, president of Washington National Cathedral had the following to say regarding the NRA's suggestion of placing police officers in schools: "That the NRA seeks to answer the problem of violence with more violence shows that their answers are directly at odds with the teachings of all faith traditions of the vast majority of people of faith in America."

Not only did Hall demonstrate his ignorance of what constitutes real violence, but with this silly-assed statement he insulted each and every police officer who puts him/herself at risk every day to protect citizens from real violence.  To equate the presence of a police officer with "more violence" is over the top.  Hall should apologize to all the police of this country for such a slap in the face.  Unfortunately I'm sure Cardinal McCarrick just nodded in agreement as Hall stuck both feet in his mouth.

Why are they only agitated about gun violence?  Given that violence is inherently evil, why are they not equally concerned about all types of violence?  How about the violence in the womb, about which Mother Teresa spoke so eloquently at the 1994 National Prayer Breakfast?  At yesterday's conference, the National Council of Churches was represented.  What is their position on baby-murder?  Quote: "Because of the diverse theological teachings of its member churches, the National Council of Churches does not have an official position on abortion"  Isn't that great?  They've no position on the murders (that is, violence) of over 3000 babies every day, but they're ready to wax indignant about police going into the schools!

We also see New Evangelical Partnership for the Common Good represented.  They are described as "progressive evangelicals".  Yep!  There's that "progressive" word again!  Looking at their website we see that they are pro "gay marriage".

Many of these folks are so morally compromised themselves that they cannot be taken seriously.  I fear that includes His Eminence.  His regrettable tendencies to hang around with pro-abortion bigwigs (Sister Carol Keehan, John Sweeney, etc) undermine any moral credibility he might otherwise have enjoyed and put to good use.  Let all these folks address real violence and not this "gun-violence" straw man.

USCCB Misses The Mark On Sandy Hook Shootings

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops today issued a statement (of sorts) on the Sandy Hook shootings and what they think are the answers.  Well, I don't know if the bishops themselves penned it (although they affixed their names to it) because it has the smell of progressive agendas all over it.

First (after receiving "talking points" from the puppet masters) they launch into gun control.  They opine the intent to protect one's loved ones is an honorable one, but simply put, guns are too easily accessible.  Let me illustrate the lack of logic by applying it to another filial duty, to wit:  the intent to feed one's loved ones is an honorable one, but simply put, food is too easily accessible.  The right to self-defense is a necessary component to the right to life itself - but that right is denied when one is deprived of the means to exercising that right.

A number of sensible articles have been written about the Second Amendment.  I would suggest that the USCCB puppet masters read them, but I suspect they full well know the truth and are doing their utmost to keep the truth from the Catholic in the pews.  Here's one on the gun-control culture.  Here's another that addresses the real fundamental cause of violence (and not just violence involving guns): America's Problem Is a Contempt for Life.

The USCCB piece ends with 5 suggestions that they claim will address violence.  Notice that 4 out of 5 have to do with gun control - that is, confiscation of guns from everybody including the law-abiding.  I've no doubt that the USCCB puppet-masters have been given their talking points from the Democrat money-bags and are obediently doing their bidding, couching their progressivism in a faux-katholyc veneer.

Most telling, of course, is the lack of mention of the complete disrespect of life and morality as discussed by Mr. Bannister's article.  Yes the USCCB made some perfunctory remarks about violence in entertainment, but that's it.  There was no reference to Mother Teresa's wise words linking abortion and general societal violence.  For that matter, there was no mention at all of the most brutal murders of 3000 tiny babies every day.  Those murders, of course, bring in buckets of money to Democrat coffers and they're accomplished with surgical weapons that cannot be utilized against any tyrannical thug that may crash down your door.

Yet another reason why I pray that the Vatican abolishes the USCCB.

Gun-Wielding Private Citizen Saves Lives

This incident occurred yesterday in Salt Lake City, Utah.  It was on local news there.  Did it make it onto any national media?  You can bet your bottom dollar that if it had been the perpetrator with a gun that the Second-Amendment bashers (including silly prelates) would have been giving speeches hither and yon and renewing their calls for gun bans.  But no, the silence is deafening.  To their immense credit, the local police praise the yet-unnamed citizen for his quick-thinking, initiative and preparedness.  If indeed the Second-Amendment bashers had their way, many more people at that store would have been injured before the police could respond.

What The Maryland Catholic Conference Calls "Success"

Today I received a cheery little email from the Maryland Catholic Conference celebrating the end of the "successful"  (???) 2013 General Assembly.  They reproduced it on their web page and I now link to it for your reading (dis)pleasure.

So what does the MCC consider to be hallmarks of "success"?  Here's the list:

• Death penalty repeal - for hardened criminals, that is.  Innocent babies are still fair game.
• Textbook funding - the "thirty pieces of silver" for which they literally sell their souls
• Drivers' licenses for immigrants - undocumented immigrants, that is.  In other words, criminals
• Gun violence - in other words, they lent their voices so they could shill for Obama's gun grab

Some of you might recall the post I produced a few days ago illustrating why I believe "gun control" actually runs counter to Magisterial teaching.  I believe the push for death penalty repeal also constitutes departure from Church teaching.  I will have a post on that shortly.

But the MCC acknowledges that not all was peaches and cream during this session.

• Abortion statistics keeping and ban after 20 weeks - failed
• A bill to require information on adoption for expectant mothers failed.

These last two items aren't minor disappointments, in my opinion.  The lack of action on these (plus what the MCC calls "successes") rendered this Annapolis session to be an abominable failure.  Unless there are changes of faces in 2014, we can expect more legislative slop.  Will we also have to expect that the MCC will drool enthusiastically over that?

Petition For The Removal Of Cardinal Cupich

A petition has been started for the resignation of Cardinal Cupich from his position as Archbishop of Chicago.  Please sign it and spread the word.

He has his priorities exactly ass-backwards from where they should be as a Prince of the Church.  Let's look at Cupich since he is actively engaged in trying to destroy another good priest, Father Paul Kalchik.  As reported before, he has ordered Fr Kalchik to go into confinement for "psychiatric treatment"; i.e. he ordered the priest to undergo brutal brainwashing.  Kalchik has literally fled for his life, much as Archbishop Vigano has.

But Cupich does have some priests in Chicago who would be legitimate patients for "psychiatric treatment.  Mahound's Paradise advises us of Father Richard McGrath, who has been credibly accused of sodomizing a 13-year old boy.  Their response?  Why, allow him to live within walking distance of a Catholic grade school, of course!  The mess was all over the Chicago newspapers so the archdiocese cannot credibly claim ignorance over the matter.

Then there's Father Michael Pfleger, "Obama's other pastor".  That nickname most likely indicates the reason why Pfleger wasn't sacked while the Messiah Most Miserable befouled the White House.  But now Obama's gone, so what's the excuse?  Could it be that Cupich and Pfleger are of the same mindset?  Well, let's see!

Cupich thanked Chicago police for allowing Pfleger to shut down Chicago highways to protest "gun violence".  Yes Pfleger is so against "gun violence" that he threatened to "snuff out" a gun shop owner.  I wonder if that is how the two vicars got their idea to issue their none-too-veiled threats to Fr Kalchik?  But I digress.  Anyway, perhaps I'm being too hard on poor ole' Pfleger.  After all, he can be the model for civility, calm, rationality.  Perhaps he doesn't need "psychiatric treatment"!  See for yourselves!



See?  Isn't that just charming and reassuring?  No wonder Cupich lets him go untethered.  He and Cupich are of the same mold - and that is NOT sarcasm.  Please sign that petition and call the Chicago chancery.

Hysteria And Hypocrisy In The Schools

Well, it seems that school officials in Tamaqua Middle School (in Tamaqua PA) are getting a tad over-zealous.  A 13-year old boy made a gesture with his fingers resembling a gun.  The principal called in the state troopers to investigate a gesture that kids have been making for decades and will continue to make (sorry, "code pink" types!  That's reality!  Deal with it!).

For this high crime and misdemeanor the boy will be suspended and be charged with disorderly conduct.  We can be grateful that his "gun" wasn't loaded with a high-caliber rubber band; otherwise he'd be in jail at this moment.  But hey!  If we're going to go down that primrose path, should we not be consistent about it?  If this boy is going to suffer legal consequences, how about the fellow occupying the White House who once said "if they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun"?  And he made a whole slew of these remarks!

"But Obama was just being rhetorical!" you say?  Well, if that's the case, what about that poor kid in PA who was just being a kid?  Let's have some return to common sense and balance here, shall we?

More To Las Vegas Massacre Than Meets The Eye

As I said in the previous post, the liberal screeching for more "gun-control" is in full swing.  One individual on facebook opined that "no, we don't need a thorough investigation" (his exact words), that we simply needed to restrict/ban guns.  I checked his wall and the meme #Istandwithplannedparenthood is right there.  He's pro-baby-murder, making a sham of any moral credibility that he was trying to claim.

I replied that we do, and others are, too.  There are many strange things about the circumstances surrounding Paddock and the shooting itself.  I won't rehash the points all these articles bring to light.  Here are thoughts of Allen West, former army officer and presidential candidate.  Other questions are stated here, here, here.

I link now to an article by George Neumayr regarding the intellectual vacuity of the "gun-control" argument.  I too think that gun-control is just one step of the progressive goal to strip people of their identities as moral, free Christians and to transform us into docile minions of the "benevolent" nanny-state tyranny.  Other steps include:

• The weakening of our moral strength by attempts to seduce into sexual licentiousness and perversions
• The persecution of Christians who don't bend to the gay mafia
• The attempts to water down pro-life and pro-family efforts with "seamless garbage" tripe
• The use of "common core" to dumb down our children so that they can't read or reason in linear and logical manners
• This list is by no means all-inclusive.

They see the Las Vegas massacre as a most opportune excuse to cram through their agenda.  Will we allow them to do so?  We must continue to pray, to speak out, to ask probing questions.

The Uvalde Massacre - More To This Than Meets The Eye

A conservative podcaster, Erick Erickson, put out a video that asks a lot of questions: questions that I've seen elsewhere regarding the Robb School situation.

So here is the chronology of the situation, as far as I can tell.  First, 18-year-old Salvador Ramos lived with his mother who was, probably still is, a drug addict.  There is absolutely no mention of his father, or any other man who might have been a father-figure to him.  Right there we have a breeding ground for disaster.

He was frequently bullied in school for his economic status and had only a few temporary friendships.  He acted out, causing him to have scuffles with the police.  That is to say that the police were quite familiar with him.   After his relationship with his mother further deteriorated, he lived with his grandmother.

His behavior, which he posted on social media, became increasingly dark, with him dressing all in black and voicing an interest in guns.  His financial status was still poor, with his job at Wendy's helping only a little.

Then, somehow, he managed to get a hold of two AR-15 rifles and ammunition, all costing about $5,000.00.  How did that happen?  First, why would he not have immediately failed background checks, owing to previous scuffles with the law?  Second, how could this impoverished kid afford it?  I'd ask who gave him the money, but again he would have failed the necessary screening.  Did someone give him the firearms?  If so, why?

On May 24 Tuesday, he shot his grandmother (who survived), then drove towards the school.  Somehow his truck wound up in a ditch.  He got out of the truck and went towards the school, firing his gun at various people along the way.  He walked into an unattended entrance, a door propped open, and eventually barricaded himself into a classroom and there shot and murdered the majority of his victims.  Here's a million-dollar question: did that open door lead to a classroom?  Is it the same classroom in which Ramos barricaded himself with his victims?

Meanwhile, local police arrived on the scene.  They stood outside the school and did absolutely nothing.  Parents were screaming at the police to do something.  Several of the parents received police ire for their protest.  Now who gave the police orders to essentially stand down and do absolutely nothing while Ramos proceeded to slaughter children?  They could hear the gunfire, and still they sucked thumb and bullied parents.  After an hour or so, it was a lone Border Control agent who finally took Ramos out.  Tucker Carlson asks many of the questions that were posed by Erickson above. 

Carlson appears to believe that these police were incompetent and were trying to save face.  I am not at all certain that it was mere incompetence, especially when one considers the almost magical ease with which a money-strapped kid obtained very expensive firearms.  Who gave Ramos those firearms?  Is there any connection between that and the order to the police to stand down?  Why was the school's main entrance unattended?  Why were no school police officers present?  Why was that door on the west side propped open?  Remember - this is a school that locked down quite a few times that year owing to human trafficking chases (being on a border town) so it's not like they didn't know safety practices.

Earning the most outrage was the behavior of the Uvalde police department.  At one point, they did enter the building, but then exited.  They then waited outside for an hour, while they could hear Ramos firing his gun.  Parents pleaded with them to go in, to no avail.  Some parents tried to take action, only to be put in handcuffs, pepper-sprayed, tackled to the ground.  One mother was arrested but was released.  She broke away from the cops, darted into the building and removed her children.  One off-duty Border Patrol agent, whose wife and daughter were in the school, received a text from his wife while at his barber's.  He borrowed the barber's shotgun, hurried to the school and evacuated his family and others from the building.

We are approaching an election cycle.  Certain Democrats would very much appreciate a crisis like this to take the public's eyes away from the utter mess that Biden et al are making of the country.  Saul Alinsky, in his book "Rules for Radicals", said "never let a crisis go to waste".  The Democrats are excellent students of Alinsky, and they would chomp at the bit to exploit such a crisis like Uvalde, perhaps even to the point of contriving one.

Each oddity about this situation, by itself, might raise an eyebrow and not much more.  But when so many oddities are apparent, their combination is much too coincidental:

• That a cash-strapped kid obtained two rifles, ammunition, body armor, etc
• That no school police officer was present that day
• That a door was propped open for Ramos's entry
• The strange stand-down behavior by local police
• The refusal to allow parents near the school

The whole thing stinks not of cowardice and incompetence, but of outright corruption.  The Texas Department of Safety is investigating the incident, but Uvalde Police and the school district are not cooperating. Why the stonewalling?

Meanwhile the typical progressive screeching for more gun confiscation sounded far and abroad.   I suppose they ignored some other news, like how a West Virginia woman shot down a maniac who was shooting into a crowd.  Also this weekend, an Ohio homeowner who was dragged outside of his home was rescued by his neighbor who shot the assailant dead.  Of course there is the aforementioned Border Control agent who borrowed his barber's shotgun and used that in his rescue mission.

The citizens of Uvalde include parents of children who lost their lives last week at Robb Elementary.  Some of those children might have been spared had the police actually done their jobs.  They need not wait until Texas has completed its investigation.  They need only wait till their local election day, when they can jettison the negligent city officials out of their offices, as well as those calling for the suspension of their Second Amendment rights.

Why Does Pope Francis Put Arms Manufacturing On Same Moral Plane As Human Trafficking??

Here is what he said today during his expose of the Spiritual Gifts, quoted from Zenit: noting traffickers of persons and manufacturers of arms, as those who will have difficulty going to the Lord since “all the fruit of his corruption has corrupted his heart.”  The Pontiff said manufacturers of arms "manufacture death." "They are merchants of death and make death merchandise.

It makes no sense.  Human trafficking and arms manufacturing can in no way be called moral equivalents.  The former is always intrinsically evil as it is the deliberate enslavement of other human beings.  Not so the manufacturing of arms, unless a particular manufacturer has in mind a concrete nefarious purpose for the arms that he/she is manufacturing.  Arms are morally neutral in and of themselves.  Depending on the purpose and disposition of their users, arms can bring about great evil - or great good.

This past Monday a father defended his daughter from two thugs by firing his weapon.  He killed one thug, wounded another and saved his daughter's life.  Will the maker of that father's gun "have difficulty going to the Lord"?  I cannot answer for the state of that individual's soul, but I'd wager that this gun would make no contribution to any difficulty whatsoever.

Now watch this report of an armed man who came to the aid of a beating victim by drawing his weapon.  Rather than being called a user of "death merchandise" he is being hailed as a Good Samaritan.  Again, the availability and use of arms helped save innocent life.

It would be so helpful if the Pope stopped mishmashing progressive talking points with attempts at catechesis.

Curbing Violence - It's The Morality, Stupid USCCB!

Sister Mary Ann Walsh, Media Relations Director for the USCCB, has an opinion piece that has been published by today's Washington Post.  Right there you can guess that Sister spouts left-wing talking points that have been given to her for that is the only way her byline would appear in the Washington Post.  Were she speaking of actual Church teaching the Post would never publish that piece.  So what is the topic of the USCCB bloviation of the day?  If you read my post about Cardinal McCarrick's latest cause-celebre, you know what it is - "gun control", that is, the confiscation of self-defense tools from decent people.

A careful read of the first paragraph illustrates the smoke and mirrors with which the progressives endeavor to blind and confuse us.  They want to instill in our minds that inanimate objects are the cause of so much violence and misery in society.  She uses forceps, needles and guns in her flawed analogy.  Of course they can be used for great evil.  They can also be used for great good.  It all depends on the individual doing the "using".  Isn't that the same for any tool?  She (and all progressives) attempt to relieve criminals of any responsibility for their actions.

Further down in the article she writes, "it is clear that assault weapons stand out dramatically as a threat to innocent life".  What is clear is that Sister is simply following the progressive script that I suspect has been given to her by her USCCB handlers, for that statement is sheer, utter nonsense.  Weapons, being inanimate objects, pose a threat to nobody.  They can be used by criminal elements or by those who defend themselves and others against those same aggressors.

If the USCCB is truly serious about ending violence, they'll do well to examine how our culture came to be so violent.  Fifty years ago, such wasn't the case - and at that time there was not nearly the plethora of "gun-control" laws on the books as there is today.  So what's the cause?  Well, to borrow a phrase from Bill Clinton's first presidential campaign, "it's the morality, stupid"!  And before all the little scolds and nay-sayers harp on my use of the word "stupid", I'll make plain that I value accuracy over diplomacy.  Indeed, the stupidity is deliberate and I can even say that there are more accurate terms and "stupid" may be the more "diplomatic".

Again, if the USCCB wants to end violence, they'll address the root causes of disobedience to God's laws with regard to sexual morality and family life.  They will insist that the clergy preach on the evils of contraception, abortion, euthanasia and the gay lifestyle forcefully and often.  They will direct the clergy to implement Canon 915 with regards to flagrant pro-abortion Catholics who dare to profane the Body and Blood of Christ - meaning that Cardinals Dolan and Wuerl need to clean up their acts.  Cardinal Dolan's Palm Sunday actions were an unmitigated disastrous scandal, serving only to embolden those who foment the evils that directly contribute to societal violence.  And of course the USCCB must give both the CCHD and CRS an immediate and unceremonious heave-ho and stop diverting Catholic dollars to anti-life and anti-God organizations.

Barring miracles, does anyone think any of what I just said will happen?  Neither do I.  The USCCB, with this Post article, has once again demonstrated why it cannot be taken seriously and why it really should be abolished in its entirety.