Skip to comments.The Bishops Were Wrong On The Ryan Budget
Posted on 08/11/2012 5:48:00 AM PDT by marcbold
In the wake of the selection of Paul Ryan as the VP nominee, you will be hearing a lot about how Ryan is a bad Catholic because the Bishops criticized the Ryan budget plan.
Let me cut to the chase, the USCCB was wrong.
The text of the letter issued by the Bishops gets the basics wrong and completely ignores the immorality of continued debt. They say...
On behalf of the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, I write to urge you to resist for moral and human reasons unacceptable cuts to hunger and nutrition programs. The committee has been instructed to reduce agricultural programs by an additional $33.2 billion. In allocating these reductions, the committee should protect essential programs that serve poor and hungry people over subsidies that assist large and relatively well-off agricultural enterprises. Cuts to nutrition programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) will hurt hungry children, poor families, vulnerable seniors and workers who cannot find employment. These cuts are unjustified and wrong. If cuts are necessary, the committee should first look towards reducing and targeting commodity and subsidy programs that disproportionately go to large growers and agribusiness
Except those draconian cuts they fear are not cuts at all, but reductions in growth from the projected baseline budgeting planned growth. To suggest that these are real cuts is disingenuous politcal speak beneath the dignity of the conference.
Further, this letter does not address the real problems facing America, rather the Bishops sit on their high horses while simultaneously sticking their heads in the sand.
This massive accumulating debt has real consequences, and those...
(Excerpt) Read more at ncregister.com ...
Ryan and the USCCB ping
FReep Mail me if you want on, or off, this Wisconsin pinterest ping list.
The BUMPs, and lack of commentary, demonstrate the accuracy of this article.
They're wrong about Obama and Obamacare, too, except for the voice in the wilderness of Sioux City.
all you Dolan-worshippers need to get your heads around the fact that there are two churches: one real, one fake. Guess which one dwells with the movers and shakers in the Halls of Power?
They are ALWAYS wrong unless it’s about the religion inself. MORE FOOD PROGRAMS is NOT the answer!! TEACHING PEOPLE to FISH is 100% better than just giving them handouts.
I’m a Catholic by choice, and what the bishops have taught me is this: if they’re against it - and I mean, of course, excluding those things that they cant be against without being obvious heretics — then it’s probably worth looking at. And the reverse holds.
In 1996 Cardinal John O'Connor did not invite then President Clinton to this event because of his stance on abortion.
But the archdiocese has extended an invitation to Obama? I love Cardinal Dolan, but cannot for the life of me think of why this is being allowed.
Amen and WELCOME HOME!!
oh for the love of gawd wake up. Archbishop Dolan is no Cardinal OConnor.
Thank you. For once it doesnt sound like a slogan.
The bishops, particularly the committee that writes on economics, etc. (I think it’s “Peace and Justice” or something similarly leftwing), are absolute fools when they stray away from things relating to religion. They’re very often fools on the latter topic, too, or have been until recently.
There is NO “Catholic” economic or political system and NONE that is intrinsically non-Catholic, as long as the liberty of the individual is respected. The latter would obviously eliminate things like Marxism, even though Marxism is the one the bishops love best, or at any rate, the one beloved of the elderly left-wing bishops. They look like idiots by trying to pronounce on economics.
From Richard Viguerie—Sign the petition!
I wanted to draw your attention to this important petition that I recently signed:
“Cardinal Dolan & the Archdiocese of New York : Disinvite President Obama from the Al Smith fundraising dinner”
I really think this is an important cause, and I’d like to encourage you to add your signature, too. It’s free and takes just a few seconds of your time.
The Bishops are trying to play at politics, when they should be sticking to religon/
Who am I to say that a Bishop is wrong, just a Catholic who goes to Church on Sunday, but you cannot call Obama an SOB for attacking the Church one minute and invite him to your Gala dinner the next.
Sending out mixed signals is killing the Church. I see it every Sunday when less and less people show up.
Alas, too many of our bishops are still stuck on Social Gospel left over from the faux Vatican II mania. My reading of the Gospel leaves the government no responsibility to take care of anybody. The government isn’t going to hell and it isn’t going to Heaven. The Gospel is about saving individual souls and the form or actions of government are irrelevant. It is about an individual’s relationship to God in prosperity or in servitude. Oppressive governments or benevolent kings are merely the environment. Jesus never spoke about what any government should do and certainly said nothing about some people coercing other people to give to yet other people. That would derive from Pride, the feeling that one knows how earthly things should be and can legitimately force others to act according to one’s feelings.
The entire country, including the Church and every other institution, did not really understand that issue very well, until just recently. The Church has since learned its lessons. The mistakes were human mistakes, and the forgiveness of God and the Church, somehow, seemed to sway Church officials into thinking that individuals with predatory natures could, somehow, “change”.
I am not willing to forgive the Catholic Church when it comes to the Church's advocacy of Socialism, as of late.
“Subsidiarity” is still sound Catholic Doctrine.
Many Popes have spoken forcefully against Socialism and Marxism.
However, today, the vast majority of American Priests can not be described as anything other than Socialists.
The Socialism of the Catholic Priesthood is, today, a much greater threat to Catholic Evangelism, and a much greater threat to the ability of the Church to continue to hold the respect, attendance and financial support of anyone with even a small amount of economic literacy.
The past can be forgiven.
A Church which sounds more and more like Hugo Chavez can not be forgiven.
Maybe Paul Ryan can save our Church, as well as our Country?
At least some Catholic leaders are starting to get it. Their long support of liberal Democrats because of what they saw as “social justice” has backfired. They can now clearly see that any healthcare plan from the Democrats will include free abortions and contraception paid for by Catholic institutions and Catholics of conscience alike. Obama is perfectly willing to shove abortion down their throats and has no regard for morality or ethics. Sadly many Catholic clergy will still cling to their liberal values and readily drink the Democrat Kool-aid.
The Bishops seem not to understand that when you make a pact with the devil you are also going to get some nasty stuff ( e.e. free abortions) along with the feeding stations for the poor they so badly covet.
Why on earth would they support the architect of Romneycare?
“There is NO Catholic economic or political system and NONE that is intrinsically non-Catholic, as long as the liberty of the individual is respected. The latter would obviously eliminate things like Marxism, even though Marxism is the one the bishops love best, or at any rate, the one beloved of the elderly left-wing bishops. They look like idiots by trying to pronounce on economics.”
Look up the term ‘subsidiarity’ sometime. Yes, there is a Catholic economic and political system. No, it’s not communism or socialism.
The reason the government pays money to farmers to not grow surplus food, and buys that food that they have produced in surplus anyway, is because of the legitimate fear that a surplus will be very damaging to agriculture.
However, the warehousing of the surplus food is exorbitantly expensive. But there can be an adjustment to the system to solve this and other problems at the same time.
Instead of paying farmers to leave their land fallow, they should be licensed to grow hemp instead of food crops. This benefits America in several ways.
First of all, hemp pollen interferes with and reduces the quality of marijuana. Marijuana growers only want unfertilized female plants that secrete the resin with THC in it. Hemp pollen not only fertilizes these female marijuana plants, stopping production of resin, but the seed produced are hybrid of much lower THC content.
Second, hemp requires little if any irrigation, fertilizer or pesticide, and can grow on even marginal farmland.
Third, hemp produces very high quality, non-acidic paper, which is far superior to wood pulp paper. While the forestry industry would decry the loss, instead of grinding trees for pulp, they would be used for much more valuable lumber.
The hemp industry would also create thousands of new, quality jobs.
This relates to food surplus as well. Farmers would still produce enough surplus that it could be distributed to the states as part of their food stamps block grant, to give away in addition to food stamps. Yet the federal government would no longer have to pay farmers billions of dollars to keep all or part of their land fallow, nor would it have to pay billions in surplus food warehousing costs.
Thus, more food for the poor, which should make the Bishops happy. Lots of money saved, which should make conservatives happy. And much higher quality paper as well.
Out of all the bishops of England, only one opposed Henry VIII all the way to the end.
I don't know who that is. But, since they love obamacare, and obama during the campaign, I'm not sure why that would surprise you.
“I don’t know who that is. But, since they love obamacare, and obama during the campaign, I’m not sure why that would surprise you.”
That would be Mitt Romney.
If you think it’s bad for the Catholic church to support Obama because of Obamacare why should they support Romney and Romneycare? Makes no sense to me.
My point -- for those of you in Rio Linda -- is that such a position conveniently implies opposition to the Romney ticket which (connecting the dots for you) implies (once again) support for obama.
oh, those crazy bishops!
Opposition to Romney does not necessarily imply support for Obama.
Perhaps not strictly, but in the case of the bishops, who (for the umpteenth freaking time) collectively love Obamacare and his brand of “social justice”, it’s a real stretch — and oh how they love to stretch — to argue otherwise.
Look, the bishops have little reason to fight FOR Romney, given how Romney screwed them over in Massachusetts over gay marriage and Romneycare.
What you should be arguing for is for the bishops to SIT OUT this election and let their parishioners decide.
If the GOP had nominated someone who was strong on what the Church believes, things would be much different then they are right now. There are some of us inside the church that are trying to keep Catholics from supporting Obama, but the most effective way to do that is to stay far, far away from bringing Romney into the conversation.
I think it's diabolical how the argument has been framed, and how we must settle for "ABO" and be satisfied if that means being forced to buy two thousand dollars worth of compulsory medical insurance whether we want or not, under penalty of law, each and every year of our existence.
Please forgive me for repeating that only one Bishop made any meaningful attempt to argue that socialized medicine in general and obamacare in particular aren't the Almighty's obvious will for mankind, opposed only by rich white guys. That was Bishop Nickless, literally a voice in the wilderness of Sioux City, IA.
The Chief Priest, Cardinal Timothy Dolan, is repeatedly and unrepentingly on the record as declaring that The Church "has been advocating for universal healthcare for nearly a hundred years.". His opposition to the mandates is, presumably, based upon the financial and moral burden that would be placed upon the church as a major healthcare and social services provider. He is otherwise strongly in favor of making you, me, and everyone else of submit to Obamacare, as long as the church gets a waiver on abortion and contraception.
“Please forgive me for repeating that only one Bishop made any meaningful attempt to argue that socialized medicine in general and obamacare in particular aren’t the Almighty’s obvious will for mankind, opposed only by rich white guys. That was Bishop Nickless, literally a voice in the wilderness of Sioux City, IA.”
Why should you apologize for criticizing the Church where she gets it wrong? The Church officials (yes, even the bishops), get it wrong sometimes.
I agree with you that the bishops need to make the stand against Obamacare not only on the grounds that it is a violation of their freedom of religion (due to requiring coverage of abortion and contraception), but also as a violation of Christian charity.
But, here’s the point. We are not going to bend on abortion and contraception, even when everyone else has already blown away. We are going to fight this lonely battle for as long as need be. The Church ISN’T going to comply and Dolan himself has expressly called for ALL the bishops to defy the mandate on Obamacare, not just for the priests but for their entire diocese, laymen included.
Dolan has stated publicly that he will do the same as Thomas More if necessary - he will not comply. And neither will the rest of us.
Yes, it might mean incarceration. Yes, it will mean losing jobs, it will mean decreased prosperity, it will mean persecution, and yes, it will mean that Catholics will be shunted off to one side even by their own.
But that is what Christ promised us right from the beginning. He said precisely this - “he who keeps his faith to the end will be saved.”
Will you fight alongside us sir? We need all the people we can get.
interesting. In the winter I attended a lecture on economics given by a Jesuit, I believe. I recall asking him something (dont recall exactly what) and his response was about the practice of "mortgaging future income" as if it were normal and acceptable. That really took me aback.
Oh, wait. I think the lecture was actually addressing the appropriateness of socialized medicine from a Catholic perspective. I recall finding it very empty other that one exchange cited above.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.