When The Church Disregards Subsidiarity...

Then we can expect church "leaders" to wax apoplectic and hysterical when the federal money spigot runs dry.  Apparently that is what they did, according to an article that appeared on page 3 of the print edition of the Catholic Standard -dated Oct 24, 2013.

The article is entitled, "Faith Leaders Welcome Government Reopening, Point To Unfinished Work".  I could not locate this on the Standard's web page, nor did I see it on that of the Catholic News Service.  I finally found it on the site of the Not-At-All Catholic Reporter.  Of course it is the sort of pig-slop that one might find on the pages of the socialist-injustice aficionado rag.  By the way, when I call it "pig slop" I don't impugn the integrity of the Reporter's reporting - on this occasion.  Rather, I use the term to accurately describe the whining and sniveling that I'm sure did spew forth from the mouths of these, uh, leaders.

They bemoaned the "lack of services" and lack of "safety net".  Well, if one examines the Principle of Subsidiarity as put forth by various popes, we see that centralized government is to be the last-resort type of safety-net, not the "first responder" as it were.  However, as I noted a week or two ago, the USCCB and the puppet-bishops seem to have some serious difficulties with reading the Catechism.  Here's paragraphs 1883-1885 regarding subsidiarity (scroll till you see those paragraphs).

Then the article goes on to quote Network, citing it as "THE Catholic social justice lobby" (emphasis mine).  Notice that it touts the Obama regime's yarn, claiming that the debt and deficits will decrease (??!??!).  Network clearly is in the number of the Minions Most Mindless of the Messiah Most Miserable.  Even the USCCB seemed to have an eye-opener regarding them, be that insight ever so brief.  This came about as Network embraced the abortion provisions in Obamacare; read this from the National Catholic Register (The Register, as opposed to the Reporter, does deserve the "Catholic" designation).

In a side bar in the Standard's print edition (found only there, as far as I know), it was lamented that the shutdown "cost Catholic Charities $25,000 each day".  What is lamentable is that Catholic Charities is just another piglet attached to a teat of the federal entitlement sow.  Ultimately, from where does that $25k/day originate?  Boys and girls, can we all say "OUR TAX DOLLARS!"?  This is not charity; it is legalized extortion.  The government has no authority under the US Constitution to exact such taxes.  Moreover, under the principle of subsidiarity and the Seventh Commandment, the Church has no moral right to accept, let alone request, such funds that are the result of aforementioned legalized extortion.

If the Church leaders were truly observing the Principle of Subsidiarity, no government shutdown would be able to get their undies bunched as they obviously were two weeks ago.  The Church is, first and foremost, about the business of saving souls.  Charitable works, while important in and of itself, plays second-fiddle to eternal salvation.  When will our modernism-boondoggled bishops acknowledge that?

ADDENDUM/CLARIFICATION
I noted in the fourth paragraph that Network was cited as being "THE Catholic social justice agency".  It should be pointed out that this ridiculous statement is the product of the Catholic News Service, an arm of the USCCB.  Both the Reporter and the Standard are merely repeating the absurd opinion.

USCCB an Accomplice to Hell Care Bill - And We Should Be Silent??

When I first started this blog three months ago, a colleague suggested that I keep posts to 200 words or less.  Given the complexity of this topic, I may not be able to implement that suggestion in this post.  However, I ask you to bear with it and follow along.  The topic is crucial and calls for more than just a perfunctory treatment.

On page 7 of the December 17th issue of the Catholic Standard is a column by Archbishop Wuerl ("Believing What the Church Believes") speaking on the bishops and their authority.  As I read the last four paragraphs of the article, I wonder if this article runs afoul of the canonical rights and responsibilities that are proper to the laity.  The following is one quote that caused me to raise my eyebrows:

"Yet, when it comes to matters of faith and morals, when it comes to giving necessary practical prudential guidance, it is the responsibility of the bishops to lead. It is also the responsibility of the clergy and faithful to recognize that leadership."  I've no problem whatsover when it comes to giving obedience to the bishops regarding faith and morals when they teach in union with the Holy Father; the Magisterium has always taught that.  However, when it comes to matters of prudential matters, even the Magisterium recognizes that these are matters over which good Catholics can (and often do) disagree.  There seems to be an overlooking of the rights of faithful laity to their legitimate opinions, particularly in matters regarded as secular - such as the health care debate being waged in Washington at this very moment.

In the last paragraph, His Excellency comments on the oath uttered by the newly-installed pastor to the Pope and College of Bishops, he states "so should every member of the faithful make the same profession. We are called to adhere with an internal acceptance to what the Church teaches because it is the Spirit guiding the teachers of the Church, the bishops, in their proclamation of the faith."  Some care might be required here, lest there be confusion between the "College of Bishops" and the "United States Conference of Catholic Bishops".  I don't know if these two terms are meant to be used interchangably, but if they are, the expectation of obedience of the laity to the USCCB is frought with many problems.

It has been demonstrated on this blog, by the writings of the Catholic Media Coalition and others that the USCCB's leadership has shown dangerous predelictions towards quasi-socialistic goals for society.  Previous entries on this blog and those of like-minded blogs have documented quite extensively that the USCCB's so-called "charitable arm", the Catholic Campaign for Human Development, have funded dangerous socialistic, atheistic and pro-abortion "community-organizing" groups that have helped the most pro-abortion politiican in US history, Barack Hussein Obama, ascend to the White House.

As a corollary to Obama's seizure of the White House, he also wants to grab control of the health care of each and every person in this nation and bring it under draconian governmental control.  And yes, it will allow for unfettered abortion.  Sadly, but not surprisingly, the USCCB supports the Hell Bill, sans abortion funding.  They state that if the abortion mandates are removed, that this health bill will be in compliance with Catholic social teaching.  See my previous post on that.  I also posted on the Maryland Catholic Conference and their trolling for the Hell Bill.

Two excellent articles have been written on this topic and I'll now link to them.  One, posted on the website of the Catholic Media Coalition, is entitled, "For Whom Does the USCCB Speak in the Health Care Reform Debate?"  The other is entitled, "Subsidiarity: Where Justice and Freedom Coexist".  Both are worthy of thoughtful study.

Both of these authors emphasize the need to understand the Catholic principle of subsidiarity.  They point out correctly that those wielding power in the USCCB hold this fundamental principle in contempt.  The first article quotes from 1 Samuel 8:10-18.  I urge you to read it, as it states quite clearly God's displeasure with centralized government, as often that government usurps His role in society.  Our Founding Fathers understood it.  However, as we have rushed towards abandonmnet of God and of Christian morals (particularly in matters of life and sexual ethics), we have looked to the government to be our task-masters.  We have become morally weak and flabby and crave a "nanny" to care for our needs in our laziness.  As history tries to teach us, there will always be some smooth-talking tyrant who is all-too-willing to oblige such a deadly request.

The author of the second article states where a Catholic News Service (a branch of the USCCB) columnist twisted the principle of subsidiarty with this quote:"The Church’s teaching of subsidiarity insists that higher levels of government and social organizations must take action and do what individuals and smaller groups cannot do for themselves." Of course that's not true.  I remember having an almost identical conversation with a staffer at the Maryland Catholic Conference, where he flat out pooh-poohed the principle of subsidiarity.  He has since moved on to the USCCB; I don't know if he is still there.  At any rate, have you noticed that "advocacy for the poor", at least in the eyes of these socialism-adoring "Catholic" agencies really means badgering the government to throw money at whatever the concern may be? 

That's exactly what the USCCB is attempting to do with the Hell Bill - to take our money and throw it towards the government, ostensibly to solve a problem.  In reality, they are turning a blind eye to the babies and to the elderly and other vulnerable individuals who will be killed outright or have their care rationed away from them.

I'll close this with anothe quote from the first article, which in turn is a quote from Democracy in America by Alexis De Tocqueville: “A man’s admiration for absolute government is proportionate to the contempt he feels for those around him.”   That does sum up the USCCB's attitude towards us.  They've even gone so far as to attack Rush Limbaugh for speaking out against liberal malfeasances (read my earlier post).

I think it's way past time to dismantle the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops.

Obamacare and the Principle of Subsidiarity

The principle of subsidiarity, described in Pope Pius XI's Quadragesimo Anno and Pope John Paul II's Centesimus Annus certainly seems to be "An Inconvenient Truth" (to borrow Al Gore's term) a goodly percentage of the United States bishops. It certainly seems to be so for the USCCB and for many of the state Catholic conferences. It almost seems that there isn't a governmental handout after which they won't slobber and pant. It even seems that Renato Cardinal Martino, a former Vatican official known for his rabid liberalism, has lavished praise upon Obamacare, inherent and fatal flaws nothwithstanding.

It is therefore most refresing to see that some US bishops realize the peril that Obamacare poses to true Catholic social teaching, regardless of the presence or absence of abortion and euthanasia. Let us be clear; the specter of taxpayer-funded abortion and euthanasia is horrible beyond description. However, the elimination of these murderous provisions from the bill will not render the bill any more acceptable to the true Catholic. The presence of socialized medicine foists its own deadly and yes, sinful poisons upon civilization. Please read and study the linked articles closely.

USCCB's Progressive Problem - Limbaugh Understands, Why Not The Bishops?

During a telephone conversation with a caller last week, Rush Limbaugh spoke truth to how the Catholic hierarchy swallowed the socialist koolaid.  He echoes a point that this blog, and many others, have been making over the years.  I link to the transcript here and encourage its full reading.  Here is a key statement of his:"One of the things that I learned was the reason the Catholic Church (all the way back to the days of FDR) got roped into the liberal socialist agenda is that they became convinced that welfare was charity, and churches are big on charity.  And they thought that it would sound good for them to support massive government wealth-transfer programs, welfare programs, under the guise that it was charity.  So the Catholic Church and its hierarchy in this country slowly but surely migrated to socialism, in terms of its political preferences." 

I believe that is true for the majority of Catholics.  But there were some nefarious elements who noticed this shift and took full advantage of it - folks like Father Hesbergh, Msgr Jack Egan, etc who saw in this shift the perfect opportunity to use the Church as a tool to advance socialism.  I give credit where credit is due - they executed their strategies well.  I'm not sure who's to blame more: these not-so-covert socialists or those naive Catholics (who, by the way, forgot all about the principle of subsidiarity) who basically slept while the former had their way.

Limbaugh seems to think that the hierarchy is waking up.  I wish I could share his optimism.  Some are, but too many show signs of remaining obdurately in the progressive camp.  One sad sign emanates from the Archdiocese of Washington.  I refer of course, to their disgraceful treatment of Father Marcel Guarnizo, formerly of St John Neumann Church in Gaithersburg, MD.  Here is a priest who understood his call to proclaim the truth "in season and out of season".  The chancery, in its apology to the lesbian who received Communion sacrilegiously, not only punished a good priest but completely abdicated their own duty to "admonish the sinner" for the sake of her own soul.

Let's look at the Stand for Religious Freedom Rallies, that occurred in at least 140 cities today.  If you were relying solely on the website of the USCCB for your information, you would have learned nothing of them.  In fact, take a look at their calendar.  Do you see any mention of the nation-wide rallies on March 23?  Nope!  But what do you see on the USCCB calendar for this weekend?  Why, it's the Los Angeles Religious Education Congress!  According to this Lifesite News report, this year's dissent-fest features a bevvy of speakers who advocate for Obama, gay priests and all manners of sexual vice.  That's par for the course for this LA conference; such has been the diet they've been serving for years.  So why, oh why, does the USCCB shill for this and remain silent on the Stand for Religious Freedom rallies?  Because the progressives who run the USCCB insist on ramrodding it down the path to socialism.

If the bishops are truly starting to get serious about being bishops, they need to dismantle the USCCB.  Then they need to rediscover the principle of subsidiarity and start obeying Canon 915.

Charity, Responsibility And Subsidiarity

I've posted a bit on the Catholic principle of subsidiarity.  From CatholicVote is this video depiction of it.  Click here if you can't see embedded video.

Why #Brexit Bodes Well For The Church And Western Civilization

Today the people of Great Britain voted to leave the European Union.  This was a vote that the progressive powers that be, from David Cameron to George Soros to Barack Obama to the EU gnomes in Brussels did not want to happen.  Today the British people voted to retrieve their national sovereignty.  The one-government, new-world-order leviathan was dealt a crippling blow.  May many more follow.

Recall in 2009 that Pope Benedict reminded leaders of the EU not to forget their Christian roots.  He did this because the EU flat out refused to refer to this crucial aspect of European history in its founding documents.  In 2003 the European Parliament passed a resolution to call on its member nations to legalize abortion.  The EU's so-called "Human Rights Commissioner" exerted pressure on Poland to mandate sex education and to provide unfettered access to abortion and contraception.  Malta has faced similar pressures.  The EU has also made plain its intentions to force its member countries to recognize same-sex #mowwidge.

The above paragraph makes plain why no Catholic can support the European Union as it currently exists.  Its very existence runs counter to the Catholic social principle of subsidiarity.  It does seem that when governmental bodies are granted too much power, then indeed they do assume behaviors that are characteristic of tin-horn dictators.  EU members have been subject to dictates to admit illegal immigrants and to regulate their industries to the wazoo.  Last year, the EU's "Council" chastised British mothers for the high crime and misdemeanor of (gasp!) staying home and raising their own children!  I'd be willing to bet that some of these mothers voted to leave the EU today.

Today the hulking beast known as the European Union was given some comeuppance. Its overreaching power has been curtailed to an appreciable degree.  This can only provide relief to those Catholics who've been struggling to practice Catholic morality under the threat of the thinly-veiled tyranny known as the European Union.

On LouderWithCrowder we see some benefits to the British vote listed.  We also see similar moves afoot in the U.S. to free ourselves from progressive international tyrants.  Last week Rep Mike Rogers introduced H.R. 1205, American Sovereignty Restoration Act, to cause the withdrawal of the United States from the United Nations and to cease our funding of the UN.  Owing to the UN's own embrace of anti-life and atheistic progressivism, it has earned the moniker that I gave it several years ago - Useless Nincompoops.

Ladies and gentlemen, godless progressivism can be beat back.  We must pray and hold fast to our Catholic faith, both in our reception of the Sacraments and in the public square.  Obviously we need to come en masse to the polls in the presidential election.  Some have cynically claimed that we shouldn't bother to vote because the results are already stacked.  Well, if any vote should have been rigged, it was the Brexit vote.  If indeed it was rigged, the number of decent people voting was enough to offset any rigging.  Will we have the resolve to do the same in November?  Will we also have the resolve to combat progressivism in the Church?

USCCB Misquotes Catechism To Buttress Their Socialist Propaganda

Today Sister Mary Ann Walsh penned an article on the USCCB blog entitled "Time to Listen to the Bishops on the Shutdown".  A study of this piece makes clear that the title should be "Time for the Bishops to Abolish the USCCB".

The theme of this less-than-masterpiece is a simple regurgitation of the USCCB swan song heard throughout the fight over the passing and implementation of Obamacare.  In a nutshell, the progressives controlling the various puppet strings at the USCCB support the idea of socialized medicine.  Notice that they aren't even advocating that abortion and contraception be expunged from Obamacare.  They simply don't want to be put in the position of paying for it.  In other words, as long as they (believe that they) won't sully their hands with abortion, they've no problem whatsoever with these moral evils becoming even more ensconced within our medical system because of Obamacare.

Now notice in the fifth paragraph, the one that starts with "The bishops noted that the Catechism..".  They claim to cite the Catechism as the source of their belief that the state must supply health care.  I'll post the full paragraph below:
The bishops noted that the Catechism of the Catholic Church says it is the proper role of government to "make accessible to each what is needed to lead a truly human life," including food, clothing, heath care, education and culture.

Ladies and gentlemen, that is a misquote of paragraph 2288; here is the link to the Catechism, and you'll need to scroll to the paragraph.  I'll post it below.
Concern for the health of its citizens requires that society help in the attainment of living-conditions that allow them to grow and reach maturity: food and clothing, housing, health care, basic education, employment, and social assistance.

Are you noticing any differences??  There are two big differences.  Notice that the USCCB claims that government is the agent of provision.  The Catechism uses the word society.  They are not synonyms.  Let's look at the Catechism again, this time paragraph 1880, where "society" is plainly defined as "a group of persons bound together organically by a principle of unity that goes beyond each one of them".   Thus, the Catholic Church is a "society" as much as any civil body.  At this point, I'd also suggest a close study of paragraphs 1883-1885; they go into detail about the Principle of Subsidiarity and the danger of collectivism.

Bearing those last two points in mind, let's look at the second difference.  The USCCB uses the phrase "make accessible" while the Catechism uses the phrase "help in the attainment".   How can the government "make accessible" that which it doesn't possess?  Why, it has to seize it, doesn't it?  From whom?  Remember the phrase "from each according to his ability to each according to his need"?  That's straight from Karl Marx.  On the other hand, help in the attainment is innocuous: it could mean job skills training or truly charitable outreaches - means that don't entail confiscation from those who honestly attain goods vis-a-vis onerous taxes/fines such as the ones that Obamacare is already starting to impose.

I would propose that the USCCB is not worthy of the audience of anyone.

Circle Of Protection?? NOT!!!

Perhaps it would be more accurate to call that "Circus of Pandering". 

Here are some quotes, from the USCCB site.  "We are also committed to resist budget cuts that undermine the lives, dignity, and rights of poor and vulnerable people. Therefore, we join with others to form a Circle of Protection around programs that meet the essential needs of hungry and poor people at home and abroad."

Let's unpack that - shall we?  Let's look at "resisting budget cuts".  Ladies and gentlemen, thanks to the policies of the Messiah Most Miserable (and yes, the profligate spending that did precede him), there isn't the money to keep doling out willy-nilly.  If these "religious leaders" are going to ascribe to the federal government the moral responsibility to meet the needs of the poor, how do they think the government will finance all these programs?  Who will pay for them?  Hint!  Go look in the mirrror!  That's right!  You and I will be taxed - in fact, are being taxed - to the wazzoo.  Who else is being bled to death by taxes?  The poor!  Maybe they aren't paying much income tax (at least not yet), but they are taxed via sales tax, gas tax, etc.  Moreover, businesses are paying onorous taxes too, with dollars that they may have used to hire some of these impovershed people.  I suspect many of these "leaders" are of good heart, but their logic and thinking is downright lousy, if not actually non-existent. 
Notice the talk of "programs that meet the essential needs of hungry and poor people at home and abroad".  Now whose task is it really to meet the real needs of the poor?  Is it that of the federal government?  As I recall various Church documents on that topic, "society" is so tasked.  However, since when are "federal government" and "society" synonymous?  Answer - they aren't!

In Rerum Novarum, Pope Leo XIII set forth the principle of subsidiarity.  Basically, that principle teaches that the fulfillment of human needs must be undertaken at the lowest level of society possible - starting with the individual.  Leo was all too aware of the tendency of centralized government to arrogate to itself all manners of inappropriate functions and to grow into a behemoth.  Our American founding fathers, although predominanty Protestant, seemed to have an instinctive grasp of that principle when they set strict limits on the scope of federal goverment in the United States Constitution - particularly the Tenth Amendment.  Today we find that many progressives, many of them occupying high offices in church structures, are attempting to grow the federal government by ascribing to it all manners of responsibility - and thus authority.

On Thursday I posted about a planned bastardization of Rerum Novarum that will be run almost exclusively by socialists.  One of the two liberal chairs of a discussion panel has, and probably still is, receiving funds from George Soros via the magazine that he edits.  These are the sorts of people whom the Amchurch bureaucracy is allowing to interpret and mutate the authentic social teachings of the Church.  This "circus/circle" is just one more manifestation.

ps HT to Pewsitter

USCCB's Upcoming Catholic Social Ministry Gathering

This year's gabfest is scheduled for Feb 10-13 at the Washington Marriott Wardman Park Hotel.  With John Carr, Ralph McCloud and Mary Wright of Just Faith on the Planning Committee, one can safely assume that the stench of progressivism will drift throughout the meeting halls and workshops.

Among the featured speakers is Mark Shields of PBS.  Of course that means his salary is paid in part by you and me via our tax dollars.  Therefore, is it any wonder that he complained that "no Republican in the House or Senate for 22 years has voted to increase taxes"?  No tax increase, no raise - the poor fella!  But that was in December.  Now he must be breathing sighs of relief after the GOP capitulation over the "fiscal cliff" deal.  In this clip you'll hear him say, "losing their virginity on the issue of tax cuts is an important thing to these Republicans who have not voted to increase taxes...".  Actually, the GOP lost their virtue with the fiscal cliff deal, but I digress.  I certainly hope that such metaphors will not spew forth from Shields' mouth at this USCCB session.  The clip is below the jump break so

Pax Christi At Burtonsville Catholic Church - Community Organizing

Here's the announcement from a newsletter that I receive:

Fund our Communities.  Presentation and discussion on ways the U.S. military budget can be cut to free up money for community needs.  Tuesday, May 17.  7:30 p.m.  Parish Life Center Room 210, Church of the Resurrection, 3315 Greencastle Rd, Burtonsville, MD 20866. Sponsored by Pax Christi Burtonsville.

Here's a little background information on Pax Christi.  Its founding president is Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, formerly the Auxiliary of the Archdiocese of Detroit.  Yes, he's that one!  He's the gay-activist bishop that Rome had to force to resign.  He certainly is idolized by the left.

Its current president is Bishop Gambino Zavala, Auxiliary Bishop of the Archdiocese of Los Angeles.  I noted almost a year ago that he doesn't like blogs such as this.  Read why.  I suggest you read the entire post, and watch the clips of Bishop Zavala turning a Mass into an abysmal circus.

Bishop Zavala is also co-president of the board of Interfaith Worker Justice, an organization founding on Alinskyan principles.  Another director of that group is Tom Chabolla.  Where have we heard that name before?  Well, plenty on this blog.  He is a special assistant to the president of the SEIU - you know, the thugs that sent 500 people to stampede all over a bank official's front porch last summer?

So now that we have an idea of the dissidents who've been shaping Pax Christi's goals throughout the years, the above announcement comes as no surprise.  Read their website and see that they are big on dismantling national defense.  Ladies and gentlemen, the pacifism they promote is not in conformity with Catholic social teaching - the teaching that does recognize that a state has an obligation to defend its citzens against unjust aggression.  Whatever one might think of current military engagements, there is no justification for the gutting of the military. 

Now as far as "funding the communities" goes, upon whon does that onus lay?  Hint!  Remember the principle of subsidiarity?  If you don't, that's no surprise, as the progressive, big-government lovers don't want you to consider this basic tenet of Catholic social teaching.  As we saw Friday, even the USCCB would like to sweep that under the rug.  Answer to the question?  It's not with the Federal government, as is implied in the announcement; it's with us Catholics in the pews.

To those of you at the Church of the Resurrection, please ask your pastor why this is being allowed on Church property.  By the way - I looked on your parish website.  Under "social justice" I see Pax Christi, Just Faith - but I see no pro-life committee!  Why is that???

The "Social Justice" Crowd Helped Create This HHS Mandate Mess

I present for your consideration an article written by Father Philip De Vous that appeared in Renew America a few days ago entitled Leviathan, Civil Society and National Morality.  I think Father does an excellent job in laying out just how it is the inherent nature of a socialistic government to arrogate to itself overarching authority over the lives of citizens, becoming a tyranny.  The Founding Fathers of this nation understood that concept, which is why they set in the Constitution strict limits on the power and authority of federal government.

The "social justice" crowd within our clergy and hierarchy, particularly in the USCCB and the state Catholic Conferences, in their entreaties to the federal government to "care for the poor", have bestowed upon that same government dangerous levels of power and authority, believing that such actions would improve the lots of the poor.  Well, we see what a stellar job the Great Society of the 1960s did now, don't we?  Most of these hierarchy simply forgot that "a government big enough to give you everything is also big enough to take everything from you."  A few - maybe more than a few - occupied high positions in Church hierarchy precisely so that they could utilize this trend and turn the Church into a tool for advancing socialism and progressivism.

I differ with Father when he says, "On the whole, these are matters that are to be handled through the work of parents, priests, preachers, friends, and family, not by presidential candidates. Certainly a president needs to be a man of character, the fact that government has grown so large and invaded every aspect of life is why presidential candidates are talking, or are feeling forced to talk, about these personal things rather than things that pertain to the broad issues that constitute the national agenda."  I for one do believe that law has a role to play.  In terms of the Constitution, we see that a legitimate role of government is to defend its citizens against unjust aggression.  That would include abortion and yes, contraception for many "contraceptives are in fact abortifacients.   As the late Dr Martin Luther King Jr once said, "The law cannot make my white brother love me; but it can keep him from lynching me."  Law does have an educational component to it, and that is to teach the bare minimum standards of civil conduct, namely, what behaviors cannot be tolerated in an orderly civil society.

However, his main point is well-taken, that we must shrink government back to its Constitutional limits.  Thus the Church must stop placing demands upon it to act as a nanny; in other words, the Church needs to rediscover the principle of subsidiarity.

I now present the latest Vortex.  Michael Voris makes an even stronger case against progressive encroachment inside the Church.  I am of the view that unless we purge these elements from our leadership (an excellent start would be to do away with the CCHD), the Church's moral voice will be fatally compromised.   Click here if you cannot see embedded video.

Who Needs Pro-Aborts When We Have The USCCB??

One would have to be an ostrich with head in dirt not to know that we are in the midst of a budget showdown with the Messiah Most Miserable.  The GOP in the House seems to be showing some backbone in insisting that abortion and Obamacare be defunded - period.  The pro-abortion Democrat party has flat-out said (mostly through Reid) that they'll shut down the federal government rather than defund abortion.

Comes now the USCCB, bemoaning the governmental shutdown, whining about "the poor and vulnerable" who might be hurt by a shutdown.  Read this "action alert" from the USCCB.

I've got some clear-cut suggestions for the USCCB.

• There's something called the principle of subsidiarity that the bishops insist on forgetting.  Well, amongst other things, this principle lays the care of the poor at the feet of the Church, not high levels of government.  The USCCB cannot abdicate this responsibility.
• If the USCCB is concerned about the poor and vulnerable, they might do well to remember the poor and vulnerable babies that governmental funding would murder.  They should then raise loud and courageous voices to join ours in insisting that abortion be defunding - and that's just for starters.

USCCB - Starting to Smell the Coffee?

I speak, of course, regarding the USCCB stance on the current Obamacare debacle that the Reid-Pelosi cartel is trying to stuff down our throats. At the USCCB, some sleepyheads are starting to rub their eyes a bit, although they're far from being fully awake. They are no longer in denial that abortion is fully ensconced in the bill and are now trying to get the nations' parishes in gear to oppose the bill in its current form (about time!).

The bishops assert that "healthcare is a human right". Well, be that as it may, does it therefore logically follow that healthcare falls within the purview of Federal government? There seems to be a tacit belief on their part that it does - which of course flies in the face of the Principle of Subsidiarity. Moreover, in their unspoken belief that healthcare is Federal responsbility, they lurch dangerously towards socialistic mindsets. Go to the bottom of the linked page to see what some recent Pontiffs had to say about the dangers of socialism.

USCCB Trolls for "Good Works of CCHD" - In Vain!

In a November 13th press release, the USCCB website braggs that "Diocesan Projects Highlight the Good Works of CCHD". Well, let's take a look!

We first hear about Federation of Congregations United to Serve (FOCUS). Right off the bat, we learn that they're a PICO affiliate. Looking at the PICO site under "latest news" we see them extolling the achievements of "Massachusetts faith leaders" in securing commitments from Barney Frank and the Fed Reserve to keep families in their homes. Now doesn't that just make your heart go pitter-patter? After all, Frank et al have done such a stellar job in keeping families in their homes over the past year - right? (Please stop snickering right now!) Of course they're all gung-ho for the Obama Death Bill that passed the House last week. One of their affiliates went so far as to lament the fact that good people with common sense are finding their voices and protesting this nonsense. And the USCCB calls this a "good work"? Let's proceed.

We now examine Minnesota Immigrant Freedom Network. Its mission statement states, "Our initiatives help eliminate discrimination based on immigration status to ensure all new Americans can fully participate in building a more united and sustainable Minnesota economy." Let's translate the politically-correct gobblygoop into plain language. "We don't care if you break our laws! You can have a piece of the pie bought by law-abiding Americans simply because we're such nice suckers!" Again, I fail to see how this is a "good work".

Let's move onto Minnesota Coalition for the Homeless (two of them from Minnesota?). All they seem to do is foster the naive notion that government can and should take care of all human needs. Read their position paper to that effect. Look under "income security" and "health security". What we have here is a blatant violation of the Catholic principle of subsidiarity - a principle that the USCCB seems to hold in disdain.

As I said in previous posts, I believe that the CCHD is beyond reform simply because the purpose behind its very establishment was nefarious from the beginning. As I read such tripe on the USCCB webpage, I am all the more convinced that the USCCB itself should go into the dungheap of infamous history.

Socialism Is Evil

Anyone who has paid attention to Papal writings is quite aware of this fact (for Algore types - substitute "inconvenient truth" for "fact", if it helps).  One huge problem is that government becomes the de facto deity, the object of worship (hence the need for subsidiarity).



Father John Corapi has a bit to say about this plague called socialism.

US Bishops Support Three Pro-Life Bills

From Lifesite News we read that Cardinal DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, chairman of the Committee on Pro-Life Activities of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), announced the bishops' support of:

• Protect Life Act, H.R. 358
• Abortion Non-Discrimination Act, H.R. 361
• No Taxpayer Funding for Abortion Act, H.R. 3

While we are pleased with this support, we also call on the nation's bishops to lend support for H.R. 2, Repealing the Job-Killing Health Care Law Act.  It cannot be fixed.  Socialized medicine is inherently dangerous to innocent life.  It is completely at odds with the principle of subsidiarity and furthers the encroachment of socialism in our culture.  H.R. 2 passed the House and now is awaiting a vote by the U.S. Senate.  Your Eminences and Excellencies, please support the complete dismantling of the ACA monstrosity.

Obama's LGBT Executive Order And The Bishops' Disingenuous Protests

Yesterday the Messiah Most Miserable issued a dictatorial fiat executive order stating that no federal contractor can "discriminate" in its personnel practices based on employees' gender identity and/or sexual orientation.  Churches and related organizations are NOT exempted.  The USCCB pitched a fit.  My question is, "would this order of Obama's had been a blip on their radar screens if they had been exempted?"  Given prior behaviors, I must opine that had Obama exempted churches, they wouldn't have given a rat's rump regarding the matter.

But since the USCCB and so many of the dioceses are officially on the federal dole for so much of their budgets (e.g., those huge grants to facilitate the Central American child-trafficking scheme), they are in a panic now that it appears that their gravy trains may be pulling into the station.

John Zmirak posted quite a cogent piece on Aleteia, to which I now link.  I'll post one key paragraph below.  I'll elaborate on emboldened phrases below.

The short term impact of this on faithful Christians will certainly be unpleasant. Let’s assume that the leaders of the major Christian communions (Catholic, Orthodox and Evangelical) stand on principle.  Churches and charities that won’t collaborate will lose billions of dollars in federal funds that they had previously dispensed, channeling taxpayer money to serve the poor, recent immigrants, and others eligible for federal poverty aid. Groups such as Catholic Charities, some bishops’ migration offices, and others will see their budgets slashed. They will have to scale back their services, as the needy whom they had served get their needs met somewhere else -- by church groups which decide to play Judas, or outright secular agencies. The Christian groups that had relied on federal money to carry out their missions will have to look to their own church members for more donations, or their impact and clout will diminish.

• "Channeling taxpayer money".  This means, ladies and gentlemen, that through these "federal contracts" or "grants" or whatever you want to call them, the Church had been joining the state in dipping their grubby mits into the wallets of each and every one of us.  That is not charity; that is theft.  There is concern that the Church may be denied this "opportunity for money"; in reality, they will have removed from them an occasion of sin against the Seventh Commandment.
• "Catholic Charities..will see their budgets slashed."  I guess that means no more "needle exchange programs" as offered by Albany Catholic Charities or "Centennial Awards" being bestowed on the likes of Sister Carol Keehan or Fr. Theodore Hesburgh.  Read this link for more reasons why we should rejoice that Catholic Charities' budget might be slashed.
• "Christian groups..will have to look to their own church members for more donations."  Imagine that!  Christians being challenged to dig into their own pockets and fulfill their own Christian responsibilities.  In short, they'd be abiding (finally!) by the principle of subsidiarity.  That's how it should be done - not by clamoring for tax increases for everyone else.

If the Church is serious about being the Church of Jesus Christ and not some glorified social concerns agency, the bishops will immediately commence the process of weaning themselves from federal teats.  I suppose that means that Archbishop Lori would have to recant his recent request for a federal grant to bring illegal immigrants to the St Vincent Villa in Timonium.  What are the chances of that happening?  It may happen sooner than our bishops think - thanks be to God!

How Bishops Insert Their Feet In Their Mouths

Phil Lawler at Catholic Culture said it quite well.  On May 4th he congratulated the bishops for taking a strong stand regarding the HHS mandate.  However he rightly points out that the bishops since then have diluted their message by issuing similar statements on matters about which good Catholics can disagree, e.g., the federal budget, immigration, etc.

We know that when the bishops treat issues of intrinsic morality as just a few among a whole laundry list of "issues" that are, morally speaking, of less import, that dissident politicians can glom onto those latter issues to make themselves appear to be faithful.  Such is the case with the rabidly pro-abortion Vice President Joe Biden.  Because Rep Paul Ryan's budget proposal calls for social program cuts (along the lines of the principle of subsidiarity), many of the progressive-leaning bishops frown upon it.  Biden has decided to jump on that bandwagon, scolding Ryan for "violating Catholic social teaching".  Stop laughing!  Bishop Biden is very, very serious - don't you understand?  He says to Ryan that the budget is "contrary to the social doctrine my church teaches".   Quick!  Where's the ACLU when you need them to screech about "separation of church and state"?  Nah - I don't hear them, either!

"The social doctrine which his church teaches" states that the murder of babies is always intrinsically wrong.  No one can call himself a faithful Catholic who lends support to that evil, as Biden continues to do, to this day.  On the other hand, good Catholics can disagree as to how best to aid the poor.  The so-called "safety net" that the government offers is one of fatal entanglement.

Paul Ryan, whose voting record is pro-life, is stating his case quite plainly that his budget proposal is sound and moral.  Town Hall has a piece detailing that Ryan is not taking these insults sitting down;  he is challenging his opponents to stop measuring compassion by how much we spend. Read it and watch the video of Ryan.  If you cannot see the embedded video, click here.

We Have The Right Kind of Enemies

That's what we of the Catholic Media Coalition seem to have acquired, as a result of spreading the facts regarding the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and the sorry state of their affairs (pro-abortion alliances, funds going to all manners of dubious recipients, heavy influx of tax dollars, etc).  Catholics United, another cabal of left-wing Catholics, has started an online petition in defense of the CCHD and as a backlash against both the Reform CCHD Now Coalition and the Catholic Media Coalition.  As this blog is a member of the latter, I say to the Catholics United bunch, "Thank you for that honor!"  For indeed, being attacked by folks like that is truly an honor.

If you want some chuckles, do read that petiton.  It starts out by saying, "I am proud of the Catholic Campaign for Human Development.."  It reminds me of some of the pro-death clinic escorts with which I deal every week.  Every now and then I'll show them pictures of their fine "work" and ask them if they're proud.  Some actually say that they are proud as they look at the poor broken little bodies.  In many ways, though, the CCHD is responsible for turning those little babies into tiny corpses because of their partnerships with ACORN, PICO and other pro-abortion outfits.  And Catholics United is proud of that?  More on Catholics United later.   Now see proof positive that ACORN and Obama are intimate pals.



Now let's look at Catholics United in general.  Clicking on that link, we can now tour its website.  As we scroll down, we see that they are behind the Obama Hell Care Bill that would bring about euthanasia-pushing death panels as well as ensconce abortion in our social structure - to say nothing of socializing and rationing medicine and assuming divine prerogatives over our health. 

The next article down from that is where we see them scold some bishops who had the audacity to question the masterpiece of the Messiah Most Miserable.  They even had the gall to accuse them of distorting "the essential role government has in serving the common good."  I suppose they never heard of the principle of subsidiarity.  Some of the signers of this screed are: Fr Charles Curran, whom Pope John Paul II had dismissed from Catholic University for teaching aberrant theology, Fr. Thomas Reese, whom Pope Benedict XVI fired from his position at America and Doug Kmiec, ex-prolifer turncoat.  Great bunch of fellows!  Such credibility!

The next article down is a call to American Life League to suspend its "Bury Obamacare with Kennedy" campaign.  Speaking of Kennedy, they also mourn the "loss of Kennedy's passing."  While we certainly pray God's mercy upon his soul, we certainly lament the great harm done by Kennedy in his relentless pursuit of liberalized abortion.

Now click on "about us".  I have found that section of an organization's web page to be most illuminating, as it shows the philosophical bent of its key players.  We see, for instance, that James Salt, their "director of organizing" worked on Kathleen Sebelius' campaigns.

Readers, please keep praying and working.  We're having enough of an effect to cause a backlash.  Ora et labora!

More On The DREAM Act - And A "Just Say No" Campaign

The DREAM Act "Sabbath Push", after all was said and one, wasn't much more than a little nudge.  Still, it wasn't entirely non-existent.  Most (not all) parishes inserted a two-sided flyer from the Maryland Catholic Conference into their weekly bulletins.  For those fortunate few who didn't have their intelligence insulted, I link to it here, as I intend to pick this thing apart.  Again, I acknowledge that good faithful Catholics can adopt a wide variety of opinions on this ACT.  In fact, that has been my entire point.  My objection is with the promotion of the DREAM Act support as the "authoritative Catholic position".  There is, in fact, no such thing as an authentic Catholic position on this particular legislative matter.

We'll now begin with the analysis of the MCC's flyer, so I'd suggest that you have the pdf open in another window as we go through this.  Since this will be rather long, I'll put a jump break before it starts.  At the end, I will suggest another action step that we can take in the wake of any future "efforts" on behalf of the DREAM Act.