Not racist

Not racist

Christopher Manion has had quite enough of Catholic leaders using Holy Mother Church and her faithful for their nefarious political schemes.  Not only do they pretend their agenda is noble rather than lawless and evil.  They smear the true and obedient members of the Church as murderous bigots!  Why on Earth must we pretend that these robed men are our Apostles?  They’re nothing like Christians.

Millions of Americans, including many Catholics, were stunned when Cardinal Timothy Dolan, Catholic Archbishop of New York, attacked opponents of illegal immigration as “nativists” in a recent and widely-circulated column in a liberal New York tabloid.

Unfortunately, Cardinal Dolan’s outburst represents a long line of liberalism on the part of America’s bishops — a position based not only on their “Social Justice” leftism, but because the welfare state which they celebrate doles out over a billion dollars a year to their Non-Government Organizations (Catholic Charities, Catholic Relief Services, Catholic Migration and Refugee Services, and so on).

And Cardinal Dolan is not alone. In fact, he is merely echoing his colleague in Los Angeles, Archbishop José Gomez. Gomez routinely attacks opponents of amnesty for illegal immigrants, accusing them with a string of strong epithets. In turn, he is merely echoing his fellow bishops in his native Mexico, who frequently rise to condemn “the arrogant, xenophobic, and racist attitude of the United States” (to which Abp. Gomez adds “bigotry”).

Is it ‘racist’ for Ireland to prefer mainly to be comprised of Irishmen, for Italy to prefer Italians, Germany Germans and Japan Japanese?  How about some deference toward Christian backgrounds?  Is that immoral?  What about Muslims?  How about criminals?

Must we choose between being fools and the enemies of our Bishops?

Nonetheless, the notion that all Caucasian Americans are guilty until proven innocent goes far to explain Cardinal Dolan’s unctuous condescension as he recalls his days as a teacher.

Any college student, he implies, knows that to oppose amnesty for illegal aliens (a term he refuses to acknowledge, by the way), or to demand that they follow the law (including the Ten Commandments) is nativist, backward — and anti-Catholic.

This unwarranted assertion cannot go unchallenged, since it is both unjust and counter-factual. Counter-factual because many Catholics are among the millions of Americans who oppose Obama’s program to import as many Third-World immigrants, legal and illegal, into the United States as possible.

Moreover, many of those same immigrants are not Catholic.

It is unjust because the Cardinal implies that anyone who disagrees with him is nativist — as though support of amnesty for illegal aliens were a requirement of Catholic Faith and Morals. This grievously overstates the matter.

What is required by Catholic Faith and Morals goes unmentioned: the doctrine on contraception and other sexual sins contained in Humanae Vitae.

Yet, in 2013 Cardinal Dolan bragged on national television that he has “only rarely, in my 37 years as a priest” taught the truths of that genuinely Magisterial document.

What is it that induces our bishops to ignore the Church’s timeless teachings, and instead browbeat us with their political preferences disguised as moral imperatives?

Well, as my father used to tell his Notre Dame Law students for thirty years, “if you take the first bribe, you may as well take the rest.”

So permit me ask a parallel classroom question to those that Professor Dolan shared with his college students years ago.

The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB for short) and its subsidiaries, as well as individual Catholic dioceses, receive over a billion dollars a year from the U.S. taxpayer.

Now, consider: Cardinal Dolan has exuberantly announced, on national television, that America’s bishops want to be Obama’s “cheerleaders.”

Can it be that our beloved bishops have — unconsciously, of course, just like the Cardinal’s target audience of “nativist” lay Catholics — could it be that our bishops have been bribed into silence by that billion dollars a year?

And could it be that our beloved bishops – who have watched more than thirty million of the faithful become “former Catholics” — could these prelates actually support amnesty because they want to keep the pews filled while they please their government paymasters?

These are merely questions, of course, not unjust accusations.

It seems today that the Catholic Church has no bishops, no shepherds.  That is the only reason that the flock is scattered and lost.  A bishop is not a bishop if he shows contempt for his faithful flock, as Cardinal Dolan certainly has, and teaches an anti-doctrine in place of the truth.

We are not Aaron’s Israelites dancing around the golden calf and the Cardinal isn’t Moses with the tablets.  We are humbly following God into the desert while this jolly prelate fires arrows with Pharaoh’s army.  Sorry to be noninclusive but he’s just not one of us.

 

 

 

Billionaire

Billionaire

At Creative Minority Report Matt Archbold draws attention to an unfortunate and revealing interview with Donald Trump where he was asked about all those good things Planned Parenthood does other than abortion:

Here’s what I would do if the time came: I would look at the individual things that they do and maybe some of the things are good and I know a lot of things are bad. The abortion aspect of it should not be funded by government. Absolutely…I would look at the good aspects of it and I would also look as I’m sure they do some things properly and good and good for women and I would look at that. I would look at other aspects, also. But we have to take care of women. We have to absolutely take care of women. The abortion aspect of Planned Parenthood should not absolutely – should not be funded.

This reminds me of when Ross Perot said he’d erase the deficit by “getting under the hood” and fixing it, or that he’d “get a shovel and clean out the barn.”

Archbold writes:

Well that changes things quite a bit, doesn’t it? Trump says that the abortion aspect of Planned Parenthood shouldn’t be funded but as he knows, money is fungible and Planned Parenthood already says that no taxpayer money goes to abortion. The Hyde Amendment states that no government funding can go towards abortion. So he’s saying he would consider funding Planned Parenthood as long as it didn’t fund abortion. So Trump wouldn’t change anything when it comes to funding Planned Parenthood.

Next ‘The Donald’ told the world that he’ll permit three whole exceptions for abortions too!

I am for the exceptions. You have the three exceptions. I’m for the exceptions. The health of the mother and life of the mother. I absolutely am for the exceptions and so was Ronald Reagan, by the way. There’s nothing wrong with that. You have to do it, in my opinion. Now, Marco took a strong stand. I respect him. He believes that. I have – you now it’s just a different thing. I am for the exceptions, yes.

Trump failed to cite what the third exception was.  I assume he meant in cases of rape.  Either way, we all know that one exception is every exception because this is murder, and any lying excuse will do.

I think it’s probably hard for someone in Donald Trump’s business and position to actually be pro-life today.  Very hard.

 

 

 

A sin

Ruled as Insufficiently Compelling

Pope Francis has made his universally broad new environmental Catholic doctrine mandatory.  Obey or you’re not a true Christian!  You have no choice in the matter because I’m the Pope of course.

How do we specifically comply with this new teaching from God?  There are millions of media outlets, government funded institutions, and ‘Catholic’ establishments who will provide the necessary action items.

For two years I taught social studies at an inner-city high school; for six years I ran a Catholic Worker shelter for homeless families. Then, almost 20 years ago, I became a full-time animal advocate, confident that such labor is integral to Catholicism.

As one might expect, I received plaudits from fellow Catholics for my anti-poverty and educational work but less support for my animal protection work. Most Catholics I’ve encountered seem to think of such do-gooding as fundamentally removed from religious imperatives.

Yet Pope Francis begs to differ.

“Living our vocation to be protectors of God’s handiwork,” Francis wrote in his latest encyclical, “is essential to a life of virtue; it is not an optional or a secondary aspect of our Christian experience.”

Get out your FrancisChurch notebook.  Full-time paid animal advocacy fits the bill as being ‘essential to a life of virtue!’

On the day Francis released the encyclical, he tweeted, “It is contrary to human dignity to cause animals to suffer or die needlessly. #LaudatoSi.”

Leaving aside the modern method of transmission, this statement is not actually remarkable. It’s a quotation from the Catechism of the Catholic Church.

But what does it mean that we should not cause animals to suffer or die needlessly? Surely this admonition demands more of us than that we not personally injure and kill animals. I’m convinced that we are also obligated as Catholics to avoid paying others to kill or harm animals, absent some exceedingly compelling justification.

Is a chicken sandwich exceedingly compelling?  I’m not sure but I definitely feel guilty.  I was hungry but I wasn’t exceedingly compelled I must admit.  I wish I could ask Pope Francis but he probably just eats beans.

Put another way, “purchasing is always a moral — and not simply economic — act.” That line also comes from the encyclical, in a paragraph in which Francis applauds consumer boycotts focused on pushing corporations to engage in more ethical practices.

Thinking about consumer choices in the context of animal rights, consider that by far the most needless suffering comes at the hands of the meat industry, which kills about 9 billion land animals annually. These creatures are treated in ways that would warrant cruelty-to-animals charges were dogs or cats similarly abused.

Do you know why purchasing is always a moral choice in FrancisGospel?  It’s because he’s an anti-capitalist and his hackles rise when anyone is able to do something with money.  Making money a moral choice gives him jurisdiction over every tiny decision people make.  It robs those foolish enough to believe him of their God-given freedom.

Communists think you should get what they give you when they want you to have it and they think they should own everything you’ve got.  Pope Francis Communists (Liberation Theologists) are the same, but they pretend it’s Christian morality and not just pride, envy, and thievery.

Why does FrancisChurch seem to inevitably lead to putting left wing environmentalist pressure on every tangible industry in the world?  Miners can’t mine; Farmers can’t farm.  Ranchers can’t slaughter cattle.  We can’t eat the meat they sell us.  Nobody can have any money or property that someone else doesn’t, regardless of their choices or rights.  And if you have enough to do something really productive, then you’re really in trouble.

You’re money belongs to you, not to Pope Francis and his false preaching on moral choices.  Buying poison or a mafia hit is a bad use of money, not a steak, or a gun, or an acre of land. We used to understand this was foolishness and tyranny.  Why must we now pretend it’s our Faith?