Replies

What’s exactly the matter here? Is all the other political commentary from the USCCB drowning out the religious freedom issue and making it look peripheral?

Maybe there should be a subcommittee of the USCCB dedicated to the religious freedom issue, so the rest of it can then opine on everything else from A to Z.

The USCCB, like the hierarchy of other religious organizations, is populated by narcissistic careerists who think they can say any damn thing they want and that it will assume some sort of significance just because it's they who are saying it. The Lutheran Church and other mainline churches are small, but full of just such moronic self-defined wizards.

"Is all the other political commentary from the USCCB drowning out the religious freedom issue and making it look peripheral?"

Yes, that's exactly it, and Phil Lawler (one of the best Catholic writers and thinkers in the U.S.) has nailed them on it more than once.

This is a particularly good example: The Noise-to-Signal Ratio at the USCCB (Link, and it's an incisive, short read.)

The problem is that 99 of the "Bishops' Statements" are largely or entirely outside of their canonical teaching authority. They are matters which do not involve moral absolutes or intrinsic right and wrong, but rather prudential (practical) choices between different ways to do a good thing.

For instance, "Feed the hungry" is a moral absolute (don't let people starve) but the "prudential judgment" is the queston "How you gonna do that?" It is perfectly legitimate to say, for instance, "Let's stop issuing government EBT cards and rely on Church-sponsored Soup Kitchens and Food Banks." "Let's make sure we have full employment so everyone can earn their daily bread." "Let's restrict EBT payments to rice, beans, cornbread and greens, and pay for it out of the Congressional Pension Fund." Things like that.

The USCCB should fire 90% of its staff and restrict itself to faith, morals, and internal discipline. That might be the only way to save what's left.