 |
| Sixty-nine bishops and four abstainers don't care much about these little feet! |
What have they accomplished so far? Well, they voted to uphold the sanctity of life as the pre-eminent issue of the U.S. bishops.
Goodness... What a radical idea!
Sixty-nine voted against it and four abstained!
Really?...ONE THIRD of the bishops present voted no or abstained! How silly to make defending life the first order of business for Christians when the planet is so endangered by all those little carbon footprints!
There's apparently no record of the vote by name, but Bishop Robert McElroy and Cardinal Blase Cupich both spoke against the measure, leading the charge in fact, so one can presume they were among the nays. McElroy scolded his brothers saying, "It is not Catholic teaching that abortion is the pre-eminent issue that we face as the world in Catholic social teaching." Of course, not -- the pope has made it clear that the pre-eminent issues are global warming, sustainable development, cooperating with the U.N., recognizing that God wills all religions, and welcoming the stranger who is invading your country. (Did I miss anything?)
Cardinal Joseph Bernardin, architect of the "seamless garment" approach to social justice issues, would be proud. He was zealous, not to protect Christ's little ones, but to protect liberal politicians and especially to provide cover for pro-abortion politicians like Ted Kennedy who has gone to his eternal
Protecting the most vulnerable humans is so passé! After all, protecting "Mother Earth" from all those little "dark-complexioned" babies in the Third World (targeted by friends of Francis in the Rockefeller, Ford, and Gates Foundations) and from all the red-necks and rigid Christians in the First World has equal if not greater importance, don't you agree? You have to look at all the other social justice issues not just abortion. And besides, how many unwanted babies have you adopted?
As Matt Abbott stated, "The 'ghost' of Bernardin continues to haunt the Church. Heck, it may even 'possess' the present pontiff."
/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/63599135/bernardin.0.jpg) |
| Thanks to the 69 bishops who carry on my legacy! Give my best to Ted McCarrick! Joseph Bernardin |
With their $25 million annual budget, the USCCB does plenty of damage to the Church. Many high level employees at the bishops' bureaucracy are dyed-in-the wool Democrats. They raise millions of dollars for grants to pro-abortion organizations via the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD). The USCCB bureaucracy, like Catholic Relief Services, fills many high level staff positions with Democrats who contribute to pro-abortion politicians and initiatives.
Why?
Because they are wolves in sheep's clothing! One of the bests things that could happen is to close down the USCCB, sell the building on 4th street in D.C., and give the money back to the diocesan bishops who are the ones with the real authority from the Holy Spirit. The USCCB has NO AUTHORITY WHATSOEVER!
What else did the bishops do? They elected current vice president Jose Gomez as president (the usual outcome) and Allen Vigneron as the new vice president.
While the bishops carried on their meeting indoors, a small contingent of faithful Catholics from the Catholic Media Coalition and Defend Life conducted rosary processions outside on Tuesday and Wednesday praying that the bishops would finally take Our Lady of America and enshrine her at the Basilica Shrine of the Immaculate Conception as she requests. The rosary was led on Tuesday by Bishop Mark Brennan from the Diocese of Wheeling-Charleston and on Wednesday by Bishop Joseph Coffee, auxiliary bishop of the archdiocese for the military. Thank you, Your Excellencies, and thank you to the stalwarts who braved the cold to honor Our Lady.
Why was Bishop Bransfield at the USSCB meeting yesterday just off camera but continually asked by name to announce the results of each voting occasion of the group of bishops? Does anyone know??
ReplyDeleteI think you must be mistaken. Bransfield was disinvited and said he had no intention of coming.Perhaps you are confusing him with his replacement Bishop Brennan.
ReplyDeleteCanon 212's Frank Walker is recognizing the problems with Opus Dei , while the Bishops do not.
ReplyDeletehttp://stumblingblock.org/?p=14886
Bishops - pre-Vatican II only had to answer to Rome and to God for their diocese. Cardinal Suenens (A Freemason and one of the four moderators to the Second Vatican Council) stated that Vatican II was the "French Revolution in the Church" also promoted collegiality and helped promote these Bishop Conferences around the world so they could implement their freemasonic destructive ideas. Ours in the US was founded in 1966 as the joint National Conference of Catholic Bishops. The Freemasons everywhere have been the destruction of the Church and society. May we pray for the reign of the Immaculate Heart of Mary so that Christ may reign again in the hearts of men and in our Church leaders. May Our Lady crush the head of Satan and SOON.
ReplyDeletehttps://tradcatknight.blogspot.com/2014/10/list-of-masons-in-hierarchy-of-catholic.html
I read an article this morning that puts some further information into the debate about what really happened that the 69 voted against. It is worth reading. They were NOT voting on the question of "preeminence" but on whether to keep the statement as presented by the committee or to add the entire paragraph (seamless garment language) of Pope Francis to the document. The 69 were voting against keeping the document as written. I don't totally agree with this article's author, but I think the point is worth discussing.
ReplyDeletehttps://www.catholicworldreport.com/2019/11/14/analysis-the-usccb-abortion-debate-and-what-came-after/
Nevertheless, the argument can still be made that the 69 were essentially voting no because they wanted to insert the "seamless garment" argument into the document (on how Catholics should vote) which remains controversial and is a strategy that undercuts the idea that there are some political positions that disqualify a candidate from consideration except for very serious reasons, for example, doing less harm than the opponent. I will only vote for a candidate who supports ANY abortion including rape and incest and life of the mother (which are phony issues) if the alternative is much worse. In that case I am voting for advancement of the common good.
Clarification for Anonymous:
ReplyDeleteMSGR Bransfield, whom I believe is a nephew of the bishop, is a priest and works with the USCCB as General Secretary. He's from the Archdiocese of Philadelphia. That explains the name you heard. It was, indeed, "Bransfield," just not the bishop.
All in the family, eh?