Did Bishop Jenky cross the line?

Some people are saying so, pointing to this homily.

Details:

A prominent advocate of church-state separation filed a formal complaint with the Internal Revenue Service on Thursday, accusing the Roman Catholic Diocese of Peoria of violating federal law by intervening in a political campaign.

The Rev. Barry Lynn, executive director of Americans United for Separation of Church and State, alleges that a fiery homily delivered by Peoria Bishop Daniel Jenky last Sunday effectively urged Catholics to vote against President Barack Obama in the 2012 presidential election.

Jenky’s homily criticized policies proposed by the Obama administration that would require all employers, including religious groups, to provide free birth control coverage in their health care plans. The bishop included Obama’s policies in a litany of government challenges the Catholic Church has overcome in previous centuries, including Hitler and Stalin’s campaigns.

“Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services and health care,” Jenky said. “In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, Barack Obama — with his radical, pro-abortion and extreme secularist agenda — now seems intent on following a similar path.”

Lynn has said church-affiliated agencies that operate on taxpayer dollars should follow public policy guidelines or only collect money from parishioners. But remarks delivered later in the homily prompted Lynn’s complaint to the IRS.

“This fall, every practicing Catholic must vote, and must vote their Catholic consciences, or by the following fall our Catholic schools, our Catholic hospitals, our Catholic Newman Centers, all our public ministries — only excepting our church buildings — could easily be shut down,” Jenky said.

In a letter to the IRS, Lynn wrote that Jenky violated the rules that prohibit issue advocacy and called on Catholics to vote as a bloc at the polls.

“To be sure, Jenky never utters the words ‘Do not vote for Obama,’” Lynn wrote. “But the Internal Revenue Code makes it clear that statements need not be this explicit to run afoul of the law.”

On Wednesday, Lonnie Nasatir, the regional director of Chicago’s Anti-Defamation League, demanded an apology from Jenky, calling his remarks “outrageous, offensive and completely over the top.”

Read more.

  • awashingtondccatholic

    Rev. Barry Lynn never seems to file a complaint when Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton make a political speech from the pulpit of a church? I bet we all know the answer why.

  • http://www.smalltalentmusic.com Deacon Chuck Stevens

    …apparently everyone is free to express their opinions on public matters…except the Catholic Church (if it makes you feel any better, it doesn’t just happen in the ‘States)

  • Momma Kyle

    Thank you, awashingtondccatholic—-exactly—–this only ever goes one way.
    Well color me crabby, but I for one am so tired—– we are engaged in a battle of ideas and the liberals are fighting like gladiators and conservatives are playing by the Marquious of Queensbury rules. Any time a conservative dares to boldly take a stand, the liberals unleash the rabid dogs. Of course, they never notice the liberal preaching in the churches.

  • http://ad-orientem.blogspot.com Ad Orientem

    Did he violate the law as currently written? Probably. But the issue to my mind is whether that law is constitutional. On that point I have the most serious doubts. On a total aside I think it is very dangerous when churches start taking benefits of any kind from the state, including tax benefits. When you take Caesar’s coin, you dance to his music. The Bob Jones Protestant (and deeply anti-Catholic) sect lost their tax exempt status decades ago and they did not contest it. Their leadership considers it to have been a very liberating event and their affiliated churches claim no government benefits of any kind.

  • http://egregioustwaddle.blogspot.com/ Joanne K McPortland

    A campaign event held in a church is different from preaching that takes place within a religious liturgy. It’s true that both parties have clergy (even Catholic clergy) who push the envelope of what’s allowed under tax-exempt status, but if that choice is made whoever chooses to make it had better be prepared to live with the consequences. Fr Pavone’s outright condemnation of the Democratic party threatens the tax-exempt status of Priests For Life, for example, because 501(c)3 tax exemptions prohibit campaigning for or against specific candidates or political parties. I’m not as familiar with the laws regarding church tax exemptions, but I would think there is a case to be made that Bp Jenky’s homily crossed the line. The problem will not be solved by claiming that “the other side does it, too” (even though it does). Churches and tax-exempt organizations may need to consider whether they want to forgo the benefits of tax exemption for themselves and their donors in order to secure a wider freedom to campaign. In this area, at least, it’s not simply a matter of religious freedom. There’s a quid pro quo: tax exemption requires the tradeoff of not politicking. That’s not only true for religious nonprofits–it applies to all 501(c)3 and other tax-exempt organizations.

  • Dcn Luis

    If I remember rightly, a church is not allowed under IRS rules to speak for or against a candidate. What the church can do is speak about political issues such as abortion etc.

    So did the bishop cross the line?

    In mentioning Obama by name it is close if not across the line.

    Non aligned churches such as the SBC (each church is autonomous) or non-denominational churches often get away with political speech from the pulpit because they are not the kind of target the Catholic Church is with all property in title to the bishop.

    I would add that I think the bishop is not following the US bishops voter guide.

    This is all easy for me as I was in the military and while you may vote and express your political opinions it best be done so that no one thinks that you are speaking for the military. So Eisenhower and Colin Powell were uncertain in civilian live as to what party they would choice.

    So just as in the military – no bumper stickers on my vehicle that enters the church parking lot. If the bishop wishes to endorse or anti-endorse political candidates he would have to resign to save his diocese from losing its tax exempt status.

    This is nothing new.

  • Nate

    Ad Orientem,
    This is an interesting point, and one I’ve been trying to figure out myself since becoming Catholic. I came from a small Lutheran synod that didn’t take a dime from the state, and chided the local Catholic school in town for so heavily relying on the state’s teat. It seems, quite frankly, insane to me. I frankly just don’t get this about the Catholic Church of which I now belong. But I’m guessing that this is because of a lack of understanding on my part.

    Not that this justifies the wicked actions taken by this org. against Bishop Jenky. If I were Jenky, I’d say that because the HMS told Catholic orgs, ‘up yours’, that all bets are off.

    Though this whole mess of late just underscores for me the rightness of the idea that religious neutrality and religious ‘pluralism’ with the assumption of a secular state is unworkable.
    Cf http://books.google.com/books?id=2BUqAQAAMAAJ&dq=thaddeus+kozinski&hl=en&sa=X&ei=u7-RT9mpFeax6QHGzcC8BA&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAA

  • Raymond

    Barry Lynn is obviously mad at everyone, including God. Conflict is coming, yea is at the door. time to be a Catholic by Conviction, not by accident….Well said Bishop! If the IRS wants to revoke our tax exempt status, let ‘em! Then we can really say what we want!

  • Mark

    Didn’t realize that Barry Lynn was still around. Big deal. As was pointed out, he only goes after people he doesn’t like or whose views don’t comform to his or to his financial backers. The guy lacks credibility, so who cares what he thinks?

  • Mike R

    so when PP which receives tax payer funds as a 503c endores specific candidates by name, why is there no out cry? How and why do they get away with far more obvious politcing?

  • Catherine

    The Bishop may not have crossed a legal line, but he crossed some other lines by comparing the President to Hitler and Stalin. Does anyone serious believe that Catholics in America are experiencing anything close to what those two monsters of history visited on their victims? If so, I can recommend a number of history books to set them straight, perhaps starting with “With God in Russia” by Father Walter Ciszek.

  • deacon john m. bresnahan

    Many Evangelical Protestant ministers have been courageously “pushing the envelope” rather than allow the government to turn them into housebroken lapdogs. It is good to see some Catholic bishops, including Bishop Jenky, now also refusing to allow themselves to be so cowed.
    Indeed, the media and some “watchdog” groups never negatively headline what the Rev. Al Sharpton or Rev. Jesse Jackson do on behalf of the Dem Party from the pulpits of Protestant Churches
    And what is relevant today about the two monsters of history Stalin and Hitler??? They were nurtured in and worked their way to power in radical Left-Wing politics emphasizing things like class warfare. Now look at some of the people around President Obama and Obama himself –not just promoting programs that will allegedly help the poor, but doing it by promoting class warfarre. Bill Ayers, one of Obama’s many radical Leftist mentors, have taught him well (and the media has hid it well.)

  • Melody

    Those are my thoughts, too.

  • pol

    I doesn’t matter. The bishop made himself and the Church targets for whatever reason. ALL anyone other than the poster here will hear will be that he compared the President to Hitler and Stalin and that a complaint was filed with the IRS. NOT helpful. In fact, likely a negative. Those voters who agree with the bishop were already going to vote for Romney or against the President. This election is about one issue and one issue ONLY-the economy. If the economy is ok or better by November, the President will be reelected. If it isn’t, he won’t be. Right now, he leads among independents by about 10% and independents DON”T like rants like the Bishops.
    Finally, personally, the President remains popular. It’s going to be pretty hard to morf him into a dictator.

  • HMS

    I find it incomprehensible that any reasonable, thinking, practicing Catholic could defend Bishop Jenky’s words or consider them as anything but “outrageous, offensive and completely over the top.”

    Considering the fact that the U.S. bishops have lost so much credibility and respect among Catholics and others for having so disrespected our legal system by sheltering priests who have abused young people, he should be censured.

  • RomCath

    Why is there no outcry when African-American churches host candidates to speak at Sunday services during campaign season? No church or church leader should endorse any candidate nor should any candidate speak at a church service. That goes for all churches not just the Catholic. Stick to the prinicples not the candidates.

  • Mike R

    Your not serious are you? What CURRENT bishop is doing anything that you say? Paleasee stop the generalized catholic bashing

  • Fiergenholt

    The com-box respondents who like to raise the issue as to why the African American religious leaders can get away with being political but Catholic bishops cannot, simply are naive about human history — and specifically about American History.

    In the greater history of American culture, there simply has been no effort on the part of African American religious leadership to bring everyone under their complete political thumb. Even the Black Muslim Movement under Malcolm X never believed total control was possible. For most African Americans, the goal was far more modest — they wanted equal rights for their constituencies. The fact that the best educated leaders in that community were also the religious ones — and their forums in church services every Sunday were part of their sub-culture and tradition — was not really very surprising but all rather irrelevant.

    For several hundred years of human culture, however, Roman Catholic religious leadership behaved quite the opposite. They often demanded direct political control of everyone.

    It all started with Pope Gregory VII who had a direct role in Duke William of Normandy invading England in 1066.

    While I would suggest that Pius IX was the last of the truly power-hungry popes — and Vatican I certainly suggests this to a lot of non-Catholic observers of human history — between Gregory VII and Pius IX there is an eight century history of just that type of addiction to power.

    What the papacy did in those 800 years, in the minds of a lot of non-Catholic American patriots, was to create the worst possible political nightmares that Western Europe — and thus the rest of the civilized world at that time — ever imagined.

    Bottom line: African American religious leadership has never threatened anyone politically. In contrast, Roman Catholic religious leadership’s historical 800-year addiction to political power is the broader civilized world’s worst nightmare.

    Unfair — Yup! — but perfectly understandable from human history.

  • http://jscafenette.com/ Manny

    I can’t stand Barry Lynn. He’s obsessed and monomanical. I don’t think the Bishop crossed the line. “This fall, every practicing Catholic must vote, and must vote their Catholic consciences…” That’s not endorsing a candidate.

  • Mike R

    So why then did Obama get Catholic vote and in most polls still is close or leading for this election cycle? Further one would think if Catholic hierarchy was as powerful as you say we would have had more thn just 1 Catholic POTUS in the 230+ years of this country.

  • Mark Greta

    I have believed for a long time that the IRS issue is not constitutional and hope that this goes up the line to test that issue with this court. I hope that happens. Could challenge much of what is done with the IRS to remove freedom and it could also force the Congress to actually pass major tax reform which would make the IRS obsolete.

    Barry Lynne is a walking joke. And awashingtondccatholic is right that it never seems to apply to all Churchs and to all tax exempt institutions.

  • Mark Greta

    Nate, doubt your small Lutheran synod was doing things to feed the hungry, help the poor, heal the sick, care for the old and orphans, and much more long before the tax code and move by the government to get involved in all things various tasks. Many of the early public schools in the various states were in fact Catholic schools and there are still nuns today are retired from these schools on state paid retirements for serving the community. When government got involved, they very quickly threw massive amounts of money at every problem under the sun and in essence hired various Catholic services to handle them in delivery starting the connections with hospitals, schools, orphanges, universities, adoption services and a whole lot more. Those are all centuries old missions of the Catholic Church. If catholic elementary and high schools shut down tomorrow, it would cost the tax payer an additional $18 billion a year based on the number of kids and the amount spent on average per student in the public schools. That of course does not count the simple fact that you would have no space for them and no teachers and class sizes of about 50 kids per class. The Catholic schools teach these kids now for about 10billion dollars which is paid by the parents who are also paying for the public schools.

    Without Catholic hospitals, if shut down, we would need to have a huge new building program and huge tax increases. You can go down the list and you will find there are huge connections between the federal government and these insitutions that are a massive bargain for the taxpayers. For those saying that everything Catholic should get zero funds when the entire system is set up to use these services, if they got their way they would double their tax bill and go through massive pain for years. What taxpayers should be saying is thanks for all you do for the country and the people. People have their head buried in a very dark place who cannot figure this one out.

  • Mark Greta

    Joanne K McPortland, can you give me a link where Father Pavone outright names the democratic party in discussions about voting.

    Only a fool does not know that if Catholics deny votes to the party of death, legal abortion holocaust in this country will soon end. It is in fact those Catholics who claim to be pro life and vote for the party of death that enable the abortion mills to continue to crank out 4,000 mutilations a day of infants. Can anyone show me how this is not a very simple truth? If the party of death, seeing this, changes as they were finally forced to do in giving up slavery, denial of civil rights, lynching, and firehosing and beating innocent kids simply riding a bus, then they would no longer be the party of death allowing Catholics to look at other issues. The Bishops have stated clearly that to vote for the party of death candidates, you have to have a proportionate reason to 54 million dead and 4,000 more added a day. Joanne, maybe you could give me that proportionate reason? No one else has been able to do so.

  • Mark Greta

    Dcn Luis, In reading this, I think he was clearly following the US bishops voter guide. maybe you can name a proportionate reason to 54 million dead infants and 4000 more a day. I can’t for the life of me think of any that even come close. It would be like knowing that 6 million Jews were killed in the death camps but support the Nazi Party candidates because they were great for the economy and there were fewer poor people. In fact, the Nazi party did just about end poverty in Germany, certainly far more effectively than the big government programs have done spending trillions more. When you are part of a society that is looking the other way while 4000 babies a day are butchered, it is impossible to do anything but end that as your first and essential priority.

    Maybe the bishops gave the Catholic voter to much credit for sanity by only saying they needed a proportionate reason since over 50% of them voted for the most pro abortion candidate in history. I think they assumed that since nothing could compare, the other issues would come into play if you had to pro abortion candidates running as the only choice and there were other issues then of importance. Seems like Bishop Jenky was trying to make things a little clearer for the dense folks that cannot seem to understand something like proportionate reason. I not Cardinal Burke and Archbishop Chaput and others have tried to help those dense folks as well. maybe this time people will vote to end the death camp holocaust in America and send the party of death to their end or to massive change in policies.

  • HMS

    Manny:
    There is nothing wrong and it is even admirable that a priest or bishop should tell Catholics to vote their conscience. But surely you can see that Bishop Jenky’s comments connecting our President with the likes of Hitler and Stalin is clearly going over the line.

    ““Hitler and Stalin, at their better moments, would just barely tolerate some churches remaining open, but would not tolerate any competition with the state in education, social services and health care… . In clear violation of our First Amendment rights, Barack Obama — with his radical, pro-abortion and extreme secularist agenda — now seems intent on following a similar path.”

  • Deacon Greg Kandra

    FWIW, here’s a release on the IRS prohibition on churches being involved in political activity:

    The Internal Revenue Service today reminded section 501(c)(3) organizations, including charities and churches that federal law prohibits them from becoming directly or indirectly involved in campaigns of political candidates.

    The prohibition against political campaign activity has been in effect for more than half a century and bars certain tax-exempt organizations from engaging on behalf of or in opposition to political candidates. However, these organizations can engage in advocating for or against issues and, to a limited extent, ballot initiatives or other legislative activities.

    Seems to me, on the face of it, that comparing a sitting president to Hitler might be reasonably construed as engaging in opposition to him.

    Dcn. G.

  • deacon john m. bresnahan

    Because we have a constitution with its Bill of Rights that most Americans still support, hopefully Obama won’t be able to morph himself into a dictator–even if his political party,the Dems, gets control of both the Senate and the House which already has a number of Congressmen willing to do just about anything Obama wants .
    Ignored is the fact that a hot mike picked up Obama pledging to the Russian leader Medvedev to do things Moscow will like (and by implication things we won’t like) once he doesn’t have to worry about re-election. So far no gutless. Obama worshipping mainstream media reporter has asked him what things he was talking about to Medvedev.
    And if Obama maintains what seems to be a popular blind loyalty from a large segment of the populace, that is when some leaders blossom as petty dictators.

  • Mark Greta

    Fiergenholt, you are simply wrong.
    “there simply has been no effort on the part of African American religious leadership to bring everyone under their complete political thumb”. That is a joke. Only democrats have been invited to speak and supported during the entire time that this crazy LBJ 501c3 farce has been around and they appear in those churchs and are talked about by name. If a Catholic Church did this, they would be condemned. In every election, the african american vote is the most single monolithic demographic counted on by either party. It is always way over 85%. Catholic vote over the last 10 elections have voted to elect 5 democrats and 5 republicans. Frankly, the African American leadership is leading their voters into this slavery under the democratic party for their own interest and not that of the individual African Americans needs. One party counts your vote in the pocket and the other no longer tries or cares. The life of the African American since they gave their vote away has certainly not improved much.

    “Roman Catholic religious leadership behaved quite the opposite. They often demanded direct political control of everyone.” This is such a lie that it does not bear comment as any Catholic will tell you. We just had a massive blast where Catholics are using birth control despite Church teaching in large numbers. Lets no get into 800 years, but just the last 50 or so.

    But a few facts that many do not know about this tax exempt issue:

    Senator LBJ in 1954 came up with this strategy to try to shut churches up by using the tax code and 5013C. However, he had a problem with the Constitution and so guess what..Churches were exempt and did not even have to apply.

    In order to be considered for tax-exempt status by the IRS an organization must fill out and submit IRS Form 1023 and 1024. However, note what the IRS says regarding churches and church ministries, in Publication 557:

    “Some organizations are not required to file Form 1023. These include:
    Churches, interchurch organizations of local units of a church, conventions or associations of churches, or integrated auxiliaries of a church, such as a men’s or women’s organization, religious school, mission society, or youth group. These organizations are exempt automatically if they meet the requirements of section 501(c)(3).”

    Got that, they could not make them fall under the 5013C because of the constitution.

    Churches Are “Automatically Tax-Exempt”
    According to IRS Code § 508(c)(1)(A):

    “Special rules with respect to section 501(c)(3) organizations.
    (a) New organizations must notify secretary that they are applying for recognition of section 501(c)(3) status.
    (c) Exceptions.
    (1) Mandatory exceptions. Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to—
    (A) churches, their integrated auxiliaries, and conventions or associations of churches.
    This is referred to as the “mandatory exception” rule. Thus, we see from the IRS’ own publications, and the tax code, that it is completely unnecessary for any church to apply for tax-exempt status. In the IRS’ own words a church “is automatically tax-exempt.”

    But what about my donations and writing that off on my taxes?

    Churches Are “Automatically Tax-Deductible”
    And what about tax-deductibility? Doesn’t a church still need to become a 501c3 so that contributions to it can be taken as a tax deduction? The answer is no! According to IRS Publication 526:

    “Organizations That Qualify To Receive Deductible Contributions
    You can deduct your contributions only if you make them to a qualified organization. To become a qualified organization, most organizations other than churches and governments, as described below, must apply to the IRS.”

    In the IRS’ own words a church “is automatically tax-deductible.”

    Churches Have a Mandatory Exception To Filing Tax Returns

    I think that the Churches need to take this to the courts and when they do, they will be very surprised that the court will give them complete freedom as outlined in the constitution and prevent the government from doing anything to them even if they stand up boldly and say voting for Obama as the most pro abortion candidate is a grave evil and grave sin because he is a PARTNER to the abortion mills as they boast on their own website.

    By the way, planned parenthood is a 5013C and how does this square with their calling Obama their Partner in the white house? http://www.plannedparenthood.org/about-us/who-we-are/history-and-successes.htm

    This seems to be far worse than what Bishop Jenky did. I have sent this to Barry Lynne but have not heard back on it. Wonder why..

  • Elaine S.

    I used to live in the Peoria Diocese, and I remember when Bishop Jenky became bishop. His style was evident from the beginning as shown by this incident: when a bar owner in Moline, Ill. proposed naming his establishment the “Hail Mary Sports Bar and Grill,” Bp. Jenky wrote a letter to the editor of the newspaper in that area, calling the name “blasphemous” and an insult to Our Lady. The owner (who was obviously making reference to the “Hail Mary” football pass) did eventually decide not to use that name.

    Now, to the question of whether Bp. Jenky “crossed the line” in this instance. It depends on what “line” you are talking about. If you are referring to his alleged equation or comparison of Obama to Hitler and Stalin, I say no, because if you read his remarks carefully, he did NOT say “Obama is, right now, just as bad as Hitler and Stalin.” His message was that Obama’s policies are a FIRST step toward taking the U.S. down the same road that Nazi Germany and Soviet Russia took all the way to its end — wiping out all church institutions and reducing freedom of religion to mere “freedom of worship” for an hour or so per week, if that. He’s not saying it’s that bad yet, but that we need to act now BEFORE it gets that bad.

    If the question is did Bp. Jenky cross the line with regard to IRS rules, I would say technically he did not, because he didn’t come right out and say “This fall, every practicing Catholic must vote for Romney.” However, it doesn’t take a rocket scientist or even a political scientist to figure out that he probably wants as many Catholics as possible to vote against Obama (whether by voting for Romney or for some other candidate). So he was definitely pushing the envelope there.

    In some ways I think it would be a good thing if the Catholic Church just said the heck with IRS rules and tax exemptions and its bishops and priests started telling it like it is. However, the principle that the Church should not endorse particular candidates or parties does have merit beyond just the tax concerns. It is NEVER a good thing for the Church or any religious body to become too closely identified with or beholden to a particular political party or movement. The Church is supposed to be universal; that is what her name means, after all. Christ Himself had disciples on opposite ends of the political spectrum — Simon the Zealot, who wanted to overthrow the Romans, and Matthew the tax collector, an agent of the Romans.

  • Mike

    Barry Lynn has demonstrated that he is a better Christian than Daniel Jenky is.

  • Nate

    HI Greta,
    See, that’s the thing though. Certainly the total charitable output of the local Catholic group was larger than the output of my Lutheran synod (which did a lot…to tithe was expected, let alone time and special offerings). But the Catholic group was also tremendously larger. *Proportionately,* the charitable output of the Lutheran church I was part of was *exponentially* larger. And considering that much of the charitable output of the Catholic contingent was aided by tax money, this is particularly sad. Yes, we can look at all of the wonderful charitable work the Church does, aided by the state. Indeed. The Catholic Church in America, though, is tremendously large. I have Lutheran friends who aren’t impressed, let’s just say that. My point, hidden and convoluted as it is (granted), is that this bigness can lead to complacency.

    Look. You make great points here. It’s true that the state sought out the Church, and not vice versa, way back when. It’s also true that when government got involved with autonomously run Catholic programs, it was a simpler world with a more homogenous value system. You can’t blame the Church for not seeing that they were making a deal with the devil. But in essence, that’s what happened, and that’s what they were doing. I think we can, though, blame the Church for becoming, over time, dependent on the very state that sought them out. Or perhaps I’m not seeing this right…
    Again: I could be missing something.

  • Nate

    Whoops. I said, “Hi Greta,” when I realize now that this is your last name.
    Sorry Mark!
    Cheers.

  • http://jscafenette.com/ Manny

    Yes, I agree with that. The Bishop’s analogy was a stretch. He was trying to make the point that they too limited religious freedom. However, once you touch on Hitler and Stalin, you bring in additional associations which are unfair, even if that was not the point the Bishop was making. One is not free to limit to segregate parts of a metaphor.

  • http://jscafenette.com/ Manny

    Oh please.

  • http://jscafenette.com/ Manny

    “One is not free to limit to segregate parts of a metaphor.”

    I meant to say one is not free to segregate parts of a metaphor. The whole metaphor applies whether you like it or not, whether you intend it or not.

  • RP Burke

    Imprudent, intemperate, and unjust. The bishop is three for four in violating the cardinal virtues. To answer the question posed in the title to this post, yes.

  • Deacon Norb

    Mark-Greta

    Slow down and take a deep breath. You may well be violating Deacon Greg’s terms of service. It would not hurt to review them via the link at the top of this page.

  • Donal Mahoney

    I don’t know if Bishop Jenky crossed the line but I’d like to thank him for at least getting near it, something his fellow bishops, short of Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke and a couple of others, have failed to do. The time has come for bishops to bellow, not whimper.

  • George

    Valerie Jarrett Uses Ebenezer Baptist Church To Give Political Speech
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Pr4eNqUcOXw

  • Rose

    My local priest came very close to the line as well. When the odious HHS mandate and its subsequent “compromise” were announced, both times he took to the pulpit and preached action, disobedience against the law, and strategy. The archbishop (who shall remain nameless) was silent about this preaching. Good for him. Said priest got many slaps on the back and hearty handshakes after mass. We (his parishioners) were thrilled to have such a priest. I don’t think Bishop Jenky crossed the line. Obama is dangerously close to the path of dictatorship, marginalizing religion to “freedom of worship” rather than freedom of religion. Which is, BTW, exactly the path Hitler took. So where along that line are we now?

  • Melody

    “It is NEVER a good thing for the Church or any religious body to become too closely identified with or beholden to a particular political party or movement. The Church is supposed to be universal…”
    Exactly.

  • Peter

    Bishop Jenky sounds like a foolish buffoon who is simply out to bash President Obama. When people lack faculties of critical analysis, they often throw around invocations of Nazi, Communist, Hitler, Stalin, Lenin, socialist, etc. This does nothing but desecrate those who suffered and died under those regimes. Our bishops are taking the church down a very sorry path by merging civil politics and our faith, every chance they get. The Catholic bishops of the world every day have less and less credibility by their blind eye in handling their own immoral scandals, such as the world-wide sexual abuse scandals. Likewise, they are mishandling billions and billions in donations to pay off the legal claims being made world wide while they still refuse to sufficiently address the crises. The bishops and Vatican hierarchy are heartless sexists who themselves have some of the best health care in the world, but ignored pay, health care, and social benefits for our dear religious sisters, using them as slaves of the church in an economic model of theirs that had no
    basis in reality. We need the hierarchy to quit their diversionary tactics to pull any light off of their misdeeds ( look at the current trial in Philadelphia, implicating Bevilacqua and Rigali) and promote equality in our own church.
    Christ never preached sexism. Nor authoritarianism. Jenky is a “know-nothing” agitator who doesn’t know history and is abusing his office in the church.

  • Mike R

    Then how does PP get away with actual endorsements of pro-abortion candidates assuming they fall under same laws and regulations?

  • RomCath

    HMS, all the Bishops have done that? Each and every US Bishop has shown disrespect to the legal system? Sweeping generalizations do no one any good.

  • RomCath

    Oh but that’s OK because it is an Obama supporter.

  • pol

    THIS is complete and utter nonsense! The President was a constitutional law prof, he knows very well what the limits of presidentital power are. EVEN if he has Democratic majorities in BOTH Houses of Congress, that is NO guarantee that he can do whatever he wants. Unlike Reps, Dems have a much broader idiological spectrum and not every member would vote the way he wants. They didn’t in 2009-2010 or cap and trade would’ve passed or the “cram down” in banruptcy cases that would’ve let a bankruptcy judge reduce the amount a homeowner owed on their home. His stimulous package would’ve been larger as well.
    The hot mike thing probably refers to some foriegn policy stuff and is pretty much a non-story.

  • pol

    The Bishop went after a tavern name? How petty can you get? Being in your face has a downside and I think he’s just discovering that.

  • pol

    Because Catholics in teh pews vote the way their pocket books tell them. The bishops would LIKE to be able to deliver the rank and file, but can’t because Catholics are, for the most part, no longer uneducated, immigrants who believe everything they are told by their “educated betters” from the pulpit. Euro-Catholics have assimilated and their cultural and politcal attitudes tend to reflect those of the population at large on many issues.
    Add to this, the various scandals and their credibily has been seriously compromised.
    Until a few months ago I had not read Pius IX’s “Syllabus of Errors” and so didn’t really know WHY American Protestants feared Catholocism so much. NOW, I do.

  • pol

    I wouldn’t call Bishopp Jenky a “know nothing agitator”. I’d call him a zealot and that’s even worse.

  • HMS

    RomCath:

    I stand corrected. Not all bishops, but a significant number of prominent bishops (and perhaps more than are reported) are culpable. But, surely you will have to admit that there is a climate of protection that the bishops give to each other and to priests and not enough internal regulation.

  • Matt

    You can speak all you want. You just might sacrifice your tax-exempt status. My club doesn’t get tax-exempt status.

  • friscoeddie

    Rom Cath uses the ‘everybody does it’ argument that is working so well in the priest abuse crisis. NOT

  • Mike R

    But the point of his assertion is that somehow the RC Church has this polictiacl powerful hold over its people and will dominate the culture and politcs of a country. My point is that that has not evr occured in the US so his assertion is wrong and sensentionalized; veiled as an attack upon the Bishops rights as citizens to speak their minds. It is still a free country, although many in government are doing their best to eliminate many of those freedoms.

  • Mike R

    Another thought on this issue is when a priest or bishop for that matters delivers a homily which from what I understand is his PERSONAL reflection on the readings of the day speaking on behalf of “the Church” as an institution? I believe the answer would be no. Therfore, is not the homily protected free speech of an individual citizen? During a homily, can a priest say “I” believe that the policies of Obama to be atrocious and tehrefore “I” will not vote for him. In fact, could he not even go further without violating any 503(c) rules and state that his personal prefernce is for people to vote against Obama? Now, if the USCCB came out and endorsed someone and a bishop announced it from public I would view that much differently than an individual exercising their 1st amendment rights.

  • Katie Angel

    Actually, Fascism is more “right-wing” as Americans understand the political spectrum. I think it is important to understand that radicalism appears on both ends of the spectrum and that fanatics of any kind are dangerous to our country and our democracy.

  • nitnot

    The babies are “experiencing anything close to what those two monsters of history visited on their victims.”

  • Mark

    Mark Greta, Thanks for your detailed posting. Some participants here might quibble with the framing, but I found it very helpful and informative. In any event, I doubt it violated anyone’s terms of service. Hang in there … and enjoy good the weather, if you’re having it where you are. I just came from outside, where it is gorgeous.

  • http://whiterosebrian.deviantart.com Brian A. Cook

    Have you seen the mountains evidence of conservative belligerence that liberals media outlets have amassed? For instance, Allen West just went as are as to say that over 80 of his colleagues in the government are communistic Communists. Rush Limbaugh violently distorted Sandra Fluke’s testimony for four days straight and branded her a “slut.”

  • http://whiterosebrian.deviantart.com Brian A. Cook

    Thank you for pointing out that Nazi-Fascism is a distinct ideology, and a distinctly anti-liberal one at that.

  • Joe McFaul

    Onn in Kansas City and one in Philadephia–that we know of. Several current bishops certainly engaged in the practice. I’d suggest reading the transcripts of the depositions of variosu bishop on file at bishopaccountability.org.

  • George

    Why are bothering to post on this blog when you have such hatred for the Catholic Church? There are plenty of other ‘anti-Papist’ websites to vent your spleen on.

  • Mark Greta

    A huge amount of what the Catholic Church does comes from donations of the folks in the pews during their lives and willed after. The issue of the use of tax funds should not be an issue when it is used to provide care for the poor, feed the hungry, care for the sick, help the widows and orphans with one basic premise. If the government is doing any of these things spending the money of taxpayers, the only thing that should matter is who does it best and most effectively. If an organization can provide the services with our without religious affiliation, they should be utilized based on the quality and efficiency. This was the case for decades because it was understood that the government had not right or authority to prohibit religious liberty or to set up a state godless secular state. The lie of separation of church and state meaning that religious organization had to be isolated so as to protect government and public from them as always leads to other grave evil. The separation was around government saying it had no right to do anything to any religious organization or to form a central religion be it Catholic, Protestant, Jew, or even what they did form and promote, a godless secular state religion.

    As to Lutheran, know there are probably many protesting Lutheran Churches, but the Lutheran hospitals take government funds for caring for medicare and medicaid patients each and every day. It should not be a problem for the government to use any or all various religious groups and they should be prohibited from doing anything to stop this based on their religious viewpoint because of the first amendment.

  • Mark Greta

    Friscoe, to those who hate the Catholic Church, nothing works for them in defense because their hatred of the Church drives the air they breathe. The Church does not use that as an excuse for the abuse. It is pointed out to show the total hypocrisy of those who bring up the abuse everytime the Church is mentioned, while they show zero interest in going after other child abuse showing they could care less about the children. It is all about the hatred of the Catholic Church.

    I find it interesting that many who support the party of death and scream at the Catholic Church for abuse seem to be unable to say as bad as it was to the children, the party of death has butchered 54 million babies and adds 4,000 more a day. Now that is child abuse of the first order because they cannot heal over time with God’s grace and love as abused can, for they are dead. The democratic party is the party of death and only when Catholic stop supporting it can the holocaust end and every democrat Catholic knows this and votes for it anyway which all will be called to answer for on judgement day.
    “Why did you vote for Obama when the bishops said to do so you needed some proportionate reason equal to 54 million murders? What part of Do Not Kill did you not understand?”

    It really is as simple as that. Stop voting for the party of death until they drop all support for killing babies and it will end because they will lose all power. There can be nothing more direct and simple and painting shades of grey around solid bold truth should scare anyone concerned about paradise.

  • Mark Greta

    Catherine, you say “Does anyone serious believe that Catholics in America are experiencing anything close to what those two monsters of history visited on their victims? ”

    Did those living in Germany experience what the Jews in the death camps gave up with their lives until they lost the war? No, they were living. 54 million babies are dead today because of the democratic party support for abortion since Roe. I have posted several times for anyone with an open mind and heart to read from the abortion mills own website the screams of anger about the Republican Party attempts to stop abortion and the love they have for the party of death, the democrats. They even say they now have with Obama a PARTNER IN THE WHITE HOUSE. I have yet to have democrats or thsoe so offended by mention of Hitler show why the slaughter of these babies in nine times the number 54 million, than the 6 million Jews, is not in fact nine times as worse. One might argue that if you looked at economic conditions for the poor in Germany when the Nazi’s took power to 1939, five years later, that they had created an economic miracle with almost full employment. Their unemployment went from 43.9% to below 1% in 1939 before the start of the war. Many around the world were pointing to this socialist state miracle as they were still struggling with the Depression. Don’g get me wrong, Hitler and Stalin were evil, but why is it that the democratic party with the most horrendous record of evil for over 200 years from slavery, terror arm of the KKK with lynching and more, blocking civil rights of any kind and building and sustaining Jim Crow, to abortion with 54 million dead get a total pass? I have noted on their own DNC web site that they boast of 200 years history, but start talking about that history with a limited mention of FDR who also blocked anti lynching legislation he had vowed to support.

    If anyone here will simple study and think about this party, I do not see how anyone who follows the teaching of Christ could get near it for the stench. If I am wrong on these points, if they were not the party of slavery, the party that started the civil war, the party of Jim Crow and the KKK, the party that filibustered civil rights laws and anti lynching laws, the party that supports the attack on religious liberty supporting the lie of separation of church and state, the party that vows to block any judicial appointment that hints of any support for life and the end of the american holocuast, then I would love to hear it defended.

  • Mark Greta

    So facism in nazi germany saw nothing wrong with killing jews because they were not quite human in their eyes. Democratic party in American supports the holocaust of nine times more human beings being butchered than the facist because they are not viewed as human.

    Facism did everything possible to silence religious views. Democratic Party has been trying to do the same since the 1950′s.

    Facism used liberal words to mask the take over of freedom, Democrats do the same with their bills like ObamaCare and many more which attack freedom.

    Nazi facism shoved aside the long held rule of law or constitution of Germany, Democrats want to talk about a living Constitution and invent words not there or distort meaning to shove aside our Constitution given to us by the founders.

    The nazi facism started wars, Democrats started the civil war, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, and have supported gulf I and afghanistan and gave their strong approval for Bush II to go into Iraq with two votes and repeated votes to fund the war. Obama got us involved with Libya as well and fires drones into Pakistan and also sent US troops into Pakistan for Bin Laden. Obama has a policy that it is OK to kill US citizens without trial by use of force at the will of the president.

    Nazi facism took over and regulated industries, Democrat Obama has been hard at work taking over many industries and they have been the leader in the effort to impose massive government regulations without votes on everything that moves.

    I have many more, but instead of posting a talking point, how about giving us a list that is factual and historical. This is not college thesis, but real life what each did by action and in history.

    Not sure how long it will take some Catholic to wake up to the fact they have been sold a bill of goods on the evil party closely linked to the prince of lies.

  • Mark Greta

    pol, the reason your post has vailidity is that many who vote don’t have a clue what issues are, the facts are, or history. It is why most now see the country going in the wrong direction. When you have fools that vote, fools get elected as we see with the biggest fool in my lifetime and the most driven toward abortion.

    If anyone with a brain would say I want to invest my life savings and my home to be invested and they pick Obama, they deserve to lose everything which is what will happen. Obam picked winners like the greenies Solyndra, Evergreen Solar Inc, SpectraWatt, Mountain Plaza Inc, many more in other industries such as Olsen’s Crop Service and Olsen’s Mills Acquisition Co. He has nothing to point to with the investment of billions of dollars and massive federal assistance that worked. Romney has a track record of seeing what companies make sense and what prevents companies from suceeding and his success in doing so made him financially secure. I think I would give everythig to Romney and think it makes sense in the mess we are in to give him the country as well from an economic standpoint. The 16 trillion in debt we find ourselves will not be paid off if we could take the entire life tax payments of our great grandchildren and apply them in total to the debt Obama has more than doubled. He has increased our debt more in one term than all the other presidents combined.

  • Mark Greta

    Deacon, I think that this Bishop may well have set up a test case. I will be interested to see if the IRS and federal government goes after this bishop on the basis of what he said. I would welcome it for the entire matter is against the constitution and I think could well be thrown out giving the churchs total religious freedom and liberty of the actual words on the Constitution. Would love to see the democratic party led federal government go after the Catholic Church on this issue. It would be a gift from God. Maybe we should all pray that they are so far gone in the party of death that they actually decide to do this and because it is an election year, it gets fast tracked in the courts to the Supreme Court for resoluton as with Gore vs Bush.

  • sjay

    “The nazi facism started wars, Democrats started the civil war, WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam,”

    Your count is a little tendentious there — I’m especially interested in how you give the Democrats credit for the Civil War and WWII. With Korea and Vietnam, I wonder whether you imagine the Republican party would have let the Democratic administration get away without responding to the perceived Communist threat. And I notice the Spanish American war, one of the least justifiable wars in American history and begun under Republican McKinley, escapes mention altogether.

  • Mark Greta

    Deacon Norb, I think this is a fairly important issue to discuss. Rather than try to shut it down, would be good to have those on the other side actually make solid arguments in opposition to what I have posted showing the actual errors. But if Deacon chooses to ban me for supporting religious liberty and posting truth on this important issue, it is his blog and I have full respect for him. We are fighting for the very soul of this country and to see if religious liberty actuall means anything in the future. The Bishops of this country certainly question that today in total unity. This election could be a defining point that will break America one way or the other for at a minimum of a very long time.

    Obama said he will have more flexibility when whispering to his communist friends in Russia and if one looks at his eyes when he finished making the statement, it is not one that vows to have a complete and open government which he has violated in almost every way. What he is promising when not caught on mike is what should scare the breath out of every American. So I will catch my breath when we are free of Obama and his party.

  • Mark Greta

    Melody, what is the role of Church in the world if not to point out evil to the flock they are given to help us find the path to heaven? I have not found in the most pro life Catholic bishops saying one party is completely in line with every Catholic teaching. They give us Catholic teaching that is protected as magesterial teaching and infallible from error and in those areas alone, the democratic party is in serious trouble because they support abortion in the most radical way. Now the Democratic Party seem to also be on full attack on religious liberty which for the first time in my life has united every Catholic Bishop to come out strongly opposed. They are also opposed the magesterial teaching promoting only marriage between one man and one woman. The Democratic Party is going out of its way to be opposed to the very core of beliefs which every Catholic is called to accept as an integral part of their faith. Like many republicans say, I did not leave the democratic party, it left me long ago. That should be what every Catholic who cares at all for life tells the democratic party today. If they do, most of this evil will go away. No we will never end abortions, but we will not be seeing abortions in even a small percentage of what we see each day and millions of babies will be saved. When that happens, we can unite as a people to talk about the care and assitance of these lives and even more important promote families and jobs that pay a living wage which means we might be calling on some changes in both parties in this area as well.

  • HMS

    George:
    I see nothing in Peter’s post that indicates that he hates the Catholic Church. In fact, he is expressing the opinions and thoughts of people that I know who love the Church.

  • deacon john m. bresnahan

    “Some foreign policy stuff”???? Thinking foreign policy
    issues are non-stories is ridiculous–except to the media protecting Obama. And some constitutional law prof–he got the role of the Supreme Court all wrong recently.
    And by the way George Bush, John Kerry, John McCain and all other recent presidential candidates were badgered and hounded by the media until just about every conceivable document or record about them or their health was brought public.
    But Obama is allowed to hide just about every document from the past to do with his education and health. He is rightly still considered a “phantom” president because of this hiding so much of his past. Already the media is applying this corrupt double standard to Romney and badgering and hounding him for all and any records that exist about him.

  • Don from NH

    All the bishops are republicans anyway so what is the problem??

  • Jan

    It’s called…Righteous Anger.

  • Elaine S.

    Part of the problem is that due to their being only two predominant political parties in the United States, most American assume that the ONLY alternative to affiliation with the Democrats is affiliation with the Republicans. That’s not necessarily the case, since there are third parties and independent or write in candidates for many races. And while I hesitate to recommend this, one CAN morally choose not to vote at all in a contest where one cannot in good conscience endorse ANY candidate (e.g., if both or all candidates on the ballot are pro-abortion).

    Yes, the Democratic Party does seem to be going out of its way to attack the right to life and traditional marriage — putting us pretty darn close to, if not at, the point of saying that a good Catholic can’t vote Democrat, at least for the foreseeable future, However, it would also be wrong for the Church to go “all in” with the Republican Party, which although it is closer to Catholic teaching on critical issues, isn’t completely in agreement with Catholic social teaching by a long shot. (And I say that as someone who votes GOP about 95 percent of the time, largely due to life issues.) To some extent, the Church has to, as much as possible, be above politics and not fall into the trap of looking for or endorsing a political messiah.

  • Andrea Freeland

    Because we’re not comparing the President to Hitler for wanting to provide Americans with health care. Fool.

  • Catherine

    It is Planned Parenthood’s PAC and its 501(c)4 that engage in political activity, not its charitable arm. I’m not defending them, just answering your question about how they manage to engage in political activity without violating the law.

  • Catherine

    Please see my answer above — PP also has a 501(c)4 and a PAC.

  • Catherine

    First, I’m not a Democrat, but I don’t think either party has a monopoly on purity of purpose. Second, when the Republicans had the White House, Senate, House, and (in effect) the Supreme Court, they did not end abortion. Third, I am a big admirer of Abraham Lincoln, but I do not think even he would argue that the Democratic Party started the Civil War. And finally, I think there is a moral distinction between actively ordering the torture and murder of your citizens (as did both Hitler and Stalin), and failing to stop millions of individuals in your country from making what is, tragically, a completely legal choice to have an abortion. We have a lot of work to do to persuade fellow Americas of the evil of abortion. Comparing our President to Hitler and Stalin is certainly not going to win hearts and minds.

  • pol

    Don, I’m not sure THAT’S true. However, I can tell YOU and everyone on this post that the Bishop’s homily has gone viral on the Internet and the reaction has been pretty negative. EXACTLY the opposite effect the bishop may have wanted. Trust me, it’s raising a lot of ire in places you wouldn’t expect. Reading some of the comments here have shown me that the paranoid right has made it into the American Catholic Church. I guess the truly IS bipartisan!

  • George

    Peter wrote:

    “The bishops and Vatican hierarchy are heartless sexists”

    You wrote:

    “I see nothing in Peter’s post that indicates that he hates the Catholic Church.”

    The folks you hang with feel the same way?

  • RomCath

    My oh my, what a self-righteous posting by Peter. I thought ad hominems weren’t allowed. For your info, any Sister employed in ministry these days is paid on an equal par with a lay person. The Bishops who are around today had nothing to do with what happened 40 years ago. And the sex abuse theme is a little tiresome. Seems the Bishops can’t say anything these days without that being thrown into the mix. Give it up.

  • RomCath

    Aside from the sweeping generalization, I have no problem with it if they were. Bishops are tax paying citizens. They have a right to be whatever they want to be. As long as the Democratic party is the party of death who can blame them.

  • sjay

    It’s too late by almost any stretch of the imagination for case involving Bishop Jenky to make it to the Court by this year’s election day.

  • sjay

    Nobody, not one person, that I’ve ever heard of has been forced to have an abortion by any Democratic politician, much less the party as a whole. Looking at the whole record of the Republican party, I would say that if you have a Christian worldview, you would have a pretty hard time justifying voting for most of its candidates.

  • HMS

    George:
    George;
    Let me put it this way:

    I have two brothers and four sisters. Lots of times, I do not agree with some of their actions. Sometimes, one, or two, or even all, “tick me off.”

    Does that mean that I do not love each and every one of them?
    No! Not at all.

  • HMS

    RomCath:

    I share your distaste for “ad hominem”attacks. I also dislike “ad feminam” attacks.

    But, with respect to your comment that “the sex abuse theme is a little tiresome.”

    Sad to say, that issue is going to define our contemporary Catholic identity for future generations. The bishops, both individually and as a group, were slow to address the issue and, as I see it, have never taken fully admitted their corporate responsibility.

    I hope I never tire of being reminded of that flaw in the leadership of the Catholic Church of which I am a member. There is not hatred but only sadness in my heart.

  • RomCath

    If you choose to live as a Catholic with sadness in your heart I can’t do anything about that. I choose to move on from this sad chapter. Not all Bishops are guilty and many of the current Bishops had nothing to do with it. The last 2 Popes and almost all Bishops in the country have apologized more times than I can count. How many times must I forgive? As many times as Jesus would.
    The sexual abuse issue has nothing to do with this post. It has to do with whether a Bishop crossed the line politically. Period.

  • unapologetic catholic

    This bishop;s homily is not the only Catholic bishop’s comments that have gone viral.

    Here’s a youtube of Cardinal Pell in a discussion with Richard Dawkins on Australian TV.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XN-EnjnwrSA

    How painful for Cardinal Pell! Yet, that is a self inflicted wound and that wound robs bishops from delivering ANY meaningful message on any subject. Their credibility is roundly and thoroughly destroyed. As the you tube shows…they are, at best, laughingstocks.

    With that reality, it may be better to find another way to convey the message.

    Why woudl anybody take Bishop Jenky seriously when he is so oblivious to reality.

  • deacon john m. bresnahan

    It always amazes me how so many fall for the oldest trick in the book–You don’t like what someone is saying and fear he might win the debate–SO start a debate on your opponents’ right to even be involved in the debate.
    I’ve lost track of the times bishops or religious people have exercised their American right to be involved in debates of issues in what is supposed to be the “public (open to everyone) square” and found those who don’t like their point of view turn the debate into a Church-State issue instead of rebutting the specific historical, medical, factual or constitutional points made by religious people.When that is done it is obvious that bigotry is being used as a prop to butress a losing point of view. In fact it is only religious leaders and people whose right to be involved in public discourse that is regularly questioned. Even those who strongly and vehemently oppose the policies espoused by of the NRA or Planned Parenthood or the AFL-CIO do not question their right to be involved in all and every issue in public controversy.

  • pol

    Beats me about Bishop Jenky. All I know is that a bunch of my Facebook friends shared Bishop’s rant and I can tell you that the reavtion was VERY negative. I read about Cardinal Pell’s comments and that he was forced to issue a clarification. As I’ve said, political wounds are self inflicted and these ARE poltical wounds.
    Earlier today I read an article from National Journal about no one in the United States believes anything anymore. The article studied Muncie Indiana and showed the decline in government and all local institutions, inclduing churches. Not only are mainline Prostestant Churches losing member, theh article pointed to a Pew Research study showing, that, for every person coming intot the Catholic Church in America, 4 are leaving. Bishop Jenky isn’t helping this trend, either. Of course, he may WANT a tight little church.
    The more I read I read the comments on this blog, the more I wonder just WHO some of these Catholics are. I’m a cradle Catholic nearly 60, who grea up in the church, attended a minor seminary and grea up with clergy in the family (my uncle was a monsignor, advisor to the archbsihop, founded a parish, etc. 2 aunts were nuns along with about a half dozen cousins)and I thank God that I’ve never met some of these people in person. The paranoia is palpable.

  • HMS

    Nate:
    Re your comment:
    “If I were Jenky, I’d say that because the HMS told Catholic orgs, ‘up yours’, that all bets are off.”

    I think you must have meant HHS not HMS.

    Thank you.

  • HMS

    pol:
    I share some of your background and affirm your commentary. The way the Catholics are acting today is not how I experienced it either or since Vatican II. There was polarization in the 60′s and 70′s but nothing like today. Where are we heading?

  • Mark Greta

    Catherine, The only time the Republican Party has had the white house and both houses of congress was in the years you mentioned, 2003-2006 since Roe was thrust upon the country. What during those four short years, they managed to get Justice Roberts and Cheif Justice and Samuel Alito on the court. Not to bad for a four year span. Clarence Thomas was the justice before this with Bush I and Reagan had mixed results with Antonin Scalia, Anthony Kennedy, and Sandra Day O’Connor(mixed results as she became more liberal as she aged) and moved William Rehnquist to cheif justice. Bush I, put in David Souter which proved a huge mistake. But democrats have given us solid far left liberals and solid votes for abortion with John Paul Stevens, Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, Elena Kagan. Anyone can see from this list that one side is totally pro abortion 100% for the democrats and a majority pro life with the republicans with a few mistakes. Remember that the Democrats blocked some solid pro life judges such as Bork and this became known as Borking a nominee who was pro life.

    Have they managed to overturn Roe yet? No, but the Democrats are fighting to keep it supported every chance they get as witnessed by every nominee since Roe by a Democrat. I would give the Republicans a solid B in trying despite the fact that they have never had 60 vote majority to push through known pro life judges.

    As to the civil war, if you know history, you would quickly understand that in that time, the Democratic Party controlled the south and all the states that left the union to start the civil war, despite Lincolns pleas, were Democrats. So how can you say they did not start the war. It was democrats firing on Fort Sumter. I note you do not touch the fact that democrats have been in charge starting most of the wars in US history.

    As to splitting hairs on what Hitler did versus the democrats on death camps versus abortion mills, both kill human life, the democrats just do it in nine times larger numbers. Do you deny that if the democrats were driven from power that legal abortion would go away? Maybe you are pro abortion and do not see the baby as human. Many Germans did not see Jews as human people.

    [Comment edited for excessive length. -- Admin]

  • Mark Greta

    sjay, which states left the union and started the civil war? Every single one was controlled by the Democrats and had representatives in the US Congress before leaving that were solid democrats. The shots at Fort Sumter started the civil war and came from soldiers who were democrats and in fact led by one who was only a short time before a democratic senator in the US Congress. The republican Lincoln was pleading for the states to come to a conference and try to work out issues peacefully.

    WWII has FDR in the White House last time I looked and he was a Democrat. He was also pushing every button possbile to put us in the war from denying Japan resources which we had been supplying and to giving full add and comfort to England doing what many saw as outside the neutrality act. His lend lease many said left us vulnerable to the attack that hit Hawaii to force us in. Don’t get me wrong, I support FDR moves on WWII. I am just making the point that I am tired of hearing the democrats are the party against war as some try to use it as a proportionate reason to support the party of death. I also support Korea, although I was never for involvement with Vietnam which I thought was idiotic and so did Eisenhower. I think JFK was thinking of pulling the plug when he was shot. I think the Spanish American war was a joke and was a huge mistake. In the scheme of things, it slipped my mind because it is not ranked up there in major war death tolls. So lets take that issue of war off the table on both sides as any possible proportionate reason, but also as simply something neither party can claim to be the party of peace. Still looking for a proportionate reason to support the party of death candidates that are directly responsible for the 54 million dead infants by supporting abortion. Do you deny that if the democrats was denied Catholic votes in total that abortion would not be overturned in the supreme court in a very short time frame and that along the way there would be massive restrictions on abortion?

  • Mark Greta

    HMS, I think Catholic need to hear with an open heart, soul, and mind comparisons like this when they are voting for a party of death that has been directly responsible for supporting the slaughter of 54 million babies. What is outragious is Catholics voting for the party that has been pure evil since its founding as has been pointed out several times. Why do the Democrats crow about being around for 200 years on their website, but not detail the first 135 years when they were the party of slavery, KKK, terror, Jim Crow, lynching and burnig churches, and more? Why don’t they crow about the 54 million babies the party has supported the killing of in the abortion mills? It is a sham to say I am pro choice without detailing the choice results in 54 million dead babies. It is a choice to kill innocent human life. They should say it in full…I am for giving one human being the choice to kill another resulting in the holocaust of 54 million babies. Like Hitler and the nazi’s who made killing and torturing Jews legal and killed 6 million of them, BECAUSE THEY WERE EVIL AND NOT HUMAN BEINGS.

    The Bishop was trying to wake up the people to their grave error in supporting the party of death. He is a Bishop of the Catholic Church which has a non negotiable position it is a massive grave evil and sin to kill a baby or any innocent life from conception to natural death. The day Roe passed, the Pope and Bishops should have made it clear that no Catholic can vote for a candidate that supports abortion without loss of their soul. They try to make it clear that you need a proportionate reason to 54 million dead infants, but that does not seem to make a difference to some. comparing this evil nine times worse that Hitler might save a few Catholics souls and maybe a few babies lives. Small price to pay.

  • unapologetic catholic

    Apologized but done nothing else. We have tow current pending criminal trials for bishops’ conduct just in the United States.

    I posted a youtube of Cardinal Pell discussing religion on Australian TV.

    Tell me this doesn’t make you uncomfortable:

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XN-EnjnwrSA

    This is how Catholic bishops will be treated for the next 100 years in the absence of some very serious soul searching, examinations of conscience and, I believe, resignations. The behavior of the bishops cannot be justified, excused or waved away. Period.

    The bishops’ collective handling of the sexual abuse scandal makes them incompetent to comment on any matter of morality. They have no credibility among catholics and among the general public and demonstrated vividly by the reaction to Cardinal Pell’s comments.

    Believe me, I understand the reflexive need to defend the Holy Mother Catholic Church. But, the bishops’ conduct is not defensive and it overrides all of the attempted good they do.

  • Mark Greta

    The bar owners saying they had not thought it through agreed to change the name after being made aware by the local priest first and then the Bishop.

    I think how Bishop Jenky handled this situation was well handled.

    I note a bar in Maryland called the Ale Mary not only has the name, but has actual Chalices that contained the precious blood of Christ being used as common drinking cups, and a Monstrance that is to be used to display the Sacred body of Christ for adoration is being used as a decoration sitting on the bar, and a holy water font is used as a candy dish amound the hundreds of Catholic objects they have purchased.

    The bashing of Catholics is fully accepted as OK in our society that is driven by the grave evils of the culture of death.

  • Mark Greta

    As long as some Catholics continue to support the grave evil of abortion, the rightous anger will and should continue. The culture of death is so far from any possible Catholic thought or teaching that it clearly shows how far some are willing to place their very soul in harms way to support the party of death with their long history of support of evil. May Catholics continue to battle to their dying day to try to stop the party of death from growing in this country. Everything they touch is evil and now they are in full mode attack on the Catholic Church. And to support them is giving them power which they continue to use to support the holocaust and keep the abortion mills humming. Those radical like Pope’s John Paul II and Bendict XVI and Mother Theresa were all evil for pointing out this grave evil. If Catholic’s stop voting for the democratic party of death, the laws will change to return this grave evil back toward protecting life. Yes, some will continue to seek out illegal abortions. Some today seek out many things such as murder and rape that are also illegal. But we would not have the USA laws of the land distorted as they once were to support slavery, also supported by the Democratic party.

  • deacon john m. bresnahan

    Mark makes a clearly true point that can’t really be disputed. If every Catholic in America would vote pro-life (and that most of the time today means voting against the Democrat) support for abortion-on-demand in America would end tomorrow in political circles . That is because election experts claim the number of Catholics who are “swing” voters is larger than that of any other group.

  • pol

    No, it wouldn’t. When I first became a criminal court baliff in the mid 1980′s, I learned a lot about the “old days” from my fellow much older baliff’s, including WHICH local dr’s performed abortions and were protected. I also learned about “vacations” to Puerto Rico and Mexico that quietly took place as well. IF you were wealthy or connected you could always get an abortion.
    Likely, SOME states would permit it and there would be a “pipeline” to them. Oncer, the genie is out of the bottle, so to speak, it’s pretty hard to get it baack in. You can’t go home again.

  • pol

    I don’t know, but it ain’t good. I remember the “old” church and it wasn’t pleasant. A lot of my grade school and high school classmates left the Church as soon as they could NEVER returned. I was surprised to learn how MANY of the girls left. WELL OVER HALF. By the way, I grew up in 1950′s Indiana where the remnants of the Klan still quietly operated and I can tell you these guys have NO idea what religious discrimination is really like. Factories in parts of Indianapolis where I grew up acutally STILL had signs that read: “NO IRISH OR CATHOLICS NEED APPLY” .My dad ran a construction company for my uncle and I can tell you that on MORE than one occasion, they lost contracts BECAUSE company they were doing business with discovered that they were Catholics.
    We lived in a largely Protestant neighborhood duriong the 1960 election and I can tell you that it was pretty difficult for us then, especially when the local Methodist pastor condemmed John F Kennedy from theh pulpit, telling our Protestant Democrat neighbors that they could not vote him because he was Catholic.
    But let’s fast forward to the 1990′s when my brother sold lighting equipment and the owner of the company was a conservative evagelical Protestant who held bible study for employees at lunch. When he noticed that my brother didn’t attend, he asked why and my brother made the mistake of telling him that he was Catholic and was not interested. After that, my brother’s sterling evaluations(he was a top saleman) suddenly became very negative. He was called in to several “counseling sessions” about his “poor attitude”. He took the hint and found another job. Likewise, a local lock company was the target of a Federal prob and EEOC action, during this time, for attempting to hire ONLY “Christians” and doing essentially what my brothers company did to him. The comapny eventaully settled out of court, but the bad publicity hurt the compnay enough that it was later sold to Connecticutt corp that dropped all the religious stuff.

  • deacon john m. bresnahan

    pol–Because some people can find ways to do evil it doesn’t mean our courts, politicians churches etc. should condone it and even finance it. And I think the claim of many, many secret abortions is exaggerated. Why? Because since abortion has become fully legal there is a huge shortage of babies available for adoption. Whereas before abortion became fully legal and common, there were many orphanages with babies available for adoption—babies that now get killed in the womb.

  • R Plavo

    Mr Greta, who’s fault is it going to be when abortion is outlawed but women chose it anyway? Probably by the millions, if we were able to count!

  • R Plavo

    And which presidents gave us the court that gave us Roe v Wade?

  • David J Seelie

    BRAVO Bishop Jenky


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X