Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bishop suggests excommunication for Catholics implementing border enforcement
LifeSiteNews ^ | June 21, 2018 | Deal Hudson

Posted on 06/21/2018 6:41:20 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o

(Newsmax) – Last week, Bishop Edward Weisenburger of Tucson called upon his fellow bishops to issue a "prophetic statement" on immigration that would support "canonical penalties for Catholics who are involved" in implementing President Trump's immigration policy.

Why would the thought of excommunication even enter the mind of Bishop Weisenburger? Does he mean to say that any Catholic Border Patrol Agent or ICE Officers enforcing the law are "obstinately preserving in manifest grave sin"?

If so, what is the "grave sin" that meets the criterion of excommunication according to Canon 915?

The 19,500 employees of the U. S. Border Control and the 20,000 of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) have the job of enforcing the law of securing our national borders. (There are approximately 20,000 U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcements Officers. Of the 19,437 Border Agents, 16,605 are assigned to the Southwest Border.) None of these are responsible for our nation's immigration laws or for the administrative policies of implementing them.

These are the same agents and officers who, under President Obama, deported a record 2.4 million immigrants between 2009 and 2016. Janet Murguia, the president of the National Council of La Raza called Obama the "Deporter-In-Chief."

Where was the bishop's outrage then, towards President Obama or the ICE and the Border Patrol employees enforcing his policies?

Bishop Weisenburger believes that these same employees, working under President Trump, are now in spiritual danger; canonical penalties are needed "for the salvation of those people's souls." It should be noted that Bishop Weisenburger mentioned other "border bishops" who shared his pastoral concern.

Imagine being a Border Patrol officer reading the paper at breakfast and learning you are targeted for "canonical penalties" just for doing your job. He asks himself, "Do I have to confess my occupation to my priest in confession?"

So much for the "who am I to judge" spirit expressed by Pope Francis.

The Bishops have already started preparation to deny President Trump a second term in office. I'm sure I'm not the only Catholic to think it unnecessary, even cruel, to threaten all the Catholics among the 39,500 federal employees of ICE and the Border Patrol with excommunication.

Some bishops justify their high dudgeon by arguing that asylum is a life issue, "an instrument to preserve the right life." By using the term "asylum," the bishops are trying to link immigration directly with escape from torture or persecution.

That argument digs the Bishop's hole deeper. Let's assume immigration actually has the status of a life issue. If so, where are the bishop's public threats of excommunication toward all the Catholics in Congress who support abortion-on-demand and the funding of Planned Parenthood? (Only two of the 89 Catholic Democrats in Congress are pro-life.)

Let's face it, the bishops have lost all credibility when it comes to abortion. Any attempt to connect the moral seriousness of abortion to immigration is a non-starter. The laity won't buy it any more than they did in the 2016 election.

Bishop Weisenburger himself resides in a state where three of its Catholic members of Congress are rated 100 percent pro-abortion by Planned Parenthood (Tom O'Halleran, Raul Grijalva, and Ruben Gallego, all Democrats). Has he publicly stated any concern for the salvation of their souls?

What makes the situation all the more absurd is the fact that immigration is not a life issue the way abortion is a life issue. There is no single solution to the immigration problem — it's a prudential matter allowing disagreement among Catholics regarding law and policy, including disagreements with the Bishops.

Many bishops have become dismissive of this point when it is raised. Newark's Cardinal Tobin thinks those who call immigration a prudential matter are seeking to reduce its importance, concluding, "I don't have a whole lot of time for people who reduce things to prudential judgment."

What does the Cardinal think about the Catechism's teaching on just war?

"The evaluation of these conditions for moral legitimacy belongs to the prudential judgment of those who have responsibility for the common good" (2309). Immigration policy is precisely that kind of issue. Abortion, however, is wrong "under any circumstance" (2258).

Cardinal Tobin has no time for such distinctions.

However, the crucial distinction is alive and well in the 2015 "Forming Consciences for Faithful Citizenship" — "Decisions about candidates and choices about public policies require clear commitment to moral principles, careful discernment and prudential judgments based on the values of our faith."

The intention of using excommunication to force Catholics into line about immigration policy is demeaning. It won't be viewed as an opportunity for spiritual healing but as punishment for being part of the Trump administration.

For decades, pro-life Catholics have begged the bishops to get tough with pro-abortion politicians. A few stepped up to the plate only to be scorned and isolated by their brother bishops (Bishop Gracida, Bishop Bruskewitz, and Cardinal Burke).

This level of hostility towards Trump, his staff, employees, and supporters is dividing even further an already divided Church. I've yet to hear a single bishop object to threats of excommunication over disagreements on immigration policy.

None of them, evidently, wants to disrupt the episcopal momentum towards the defeat of President Trump in 2020.


TOPICS: Activism; Catholic; Current Events; Moral Issues
KEYWORDS: commiepropaganda; communist; immigration; tucson; weisenberger
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last
To: dsc
It is a canonical offense to physically attack a member of the clergy. The penalty (e.g. excommunication) would depend on the motivation and the gravity of the offense.

By "motivation" I mean if he was attacked out of contempt for the Church, or for his office, or as a way to intimidate him in the carrying out of his just ecclesiastical duties. I don't think, for instance, that if the clergyman (physically) aggressed or attacked or threatened someone first, that physical self-defense would be forbidden.

But I'm not a canon lawyer. Read for yourself.

Delicts Against Ecclesiastical Authorities

61 posted on 06/22/2018 7:37:57 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." - 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: Tammy8

This is an excellent point.


62 posted on 06/22/2018 7:39:15 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." - 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 36 | View Replies]

To: lastchance

Thank you for sayin that. It is wrong to slime any person with baseless vile slander -— even (or especially) if that person is a priest.


63 posted on 06/22/2018 7:41:48 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." - 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: ladyjane

Because we are the Church.


64 posted on 06/22/2018 7:42:49 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." - 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: MuttTheHoople

This is a vile slander.


65 posted on 06/22/2018 7:43:22 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." - 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: 'smith

You know nothing about how he treats altar boys. When a person resorts to such dirty insinuations, it tells me a lot about the lack of regard they have for justice and truth.


66 posted on 06/22/2018 7:44:39 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." - 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Hi.

The First lady sent a scalding email to the diocese after the same pronouncement from the bishops conference in Ft. Lauderdale last week.

Deacon Wells gave her a phone call. Jonna knows him fairly well and they had a rather lively conversation.

No, we won’t be excommunicated, but the diocese knows that we back the President’s policies.

5.56mm


67 posted on 06/22/2018 7:49:14 AM PDT by M Kehoe
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: JPJones; dsc
Times are a changin’.

Will no one rid me of this turbulent priest?

68 posted on 06/22/2018 7:54:46 AM PDT by BlueLancer (Antifa and Social Justice Warriors (SJWs) = SturmAbteilung)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
Well... if a person commits war crimes he ought to be excommunicated. But lawful border security, like lawful national defense, is not a war crime. In fact, it is a service to the common good and a just, constitutional obligation.

As the Catechism says:

Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants' duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.

69 posted on 06/22/2018 7:54:49 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." - 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Godebert; MuttTheHoople

‘Papist’ is a (mildly) offense term. I don’t use offensive terms for believers in other faith communities -— and, more importantly, I do not speak of them with violence or vulgarity -— and I expect Catholics to be treated with the same consideration.


70 posted on 06/22/2018 7:58:19 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." - 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: HamiltonJay

You’re right. It’s really clerical malpractice.


71 posted on 06/22/2018 7:59:07 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." - 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

Tax the Church!


72 posted on 06/22/2018 7:59:50 AM PDT by dfwgator (Endut! Hoch Hech!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: M Kehoe

Good for your wife. It takes a certain godly gumption, in the spirit of St. Catherine of Siena. We have to stand up for the truth.


73 posted on 06/22/2018 8:01:45 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." - 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: dfwgator

That would eb well worth it if it would free the Church from this corrupting entanglement with Caesar.


74 posted on 06/22/2018 8:03:28 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God." - 1 Peter 4:17)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

File a complaint. I call them papists. I don’t care if you are offended.


75 posted on 06/22/2018 8:04:45 AM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 70 | View Replies]

To: silverleaf
The grounds under which a Catholic can be excommunicated are rather well defined, precisely to protect Catholics from arbitrary acts by out-of-control clerics.

Bp Weisenburger doesn't have even a remotely canonical justification to say what he said.

"Bishop Weisenburger himself resides in a state where three of its Catholic members of Congress are rated 100 percent pro-abortion by Planned Parenthood (Tom O'Halleran, Raul Grijalva, and Ruben Gallego, all Democrats).
If he wants to open up the excommunication bottle, he should pour a couple of tall ones for the pro-abort politicians in his diocese.
76 posted on 06/22/2018 8:15:32 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o ("The floor of hell is paved with the skulls of bishops." - St. John Chrysostom, Bishop)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Godebert

That is unfortunate on your part.


77 posted on 06/22/2018 8:17:13 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Stone cold sober, as a matter of fact.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

https://catholiccharitiesny.org/what-we-do/welcoming-integrating-immigrants-refugees/catholic-charities-immigrant-refugee-services

They make a LOAD of money helping these immigrants!


78 posted on 06/22/2018 8:20:25 AM PDT by MarineMom613 (RIP Sandra Sue, my fur baby 12/31/1999 /2010 - See you on the other side!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Mrs. Don-o

I blame it on genetics. I’m a direct descendant of John Knox.


79 posted on 06/22/2018 8:34:42 AM PDT by Godebert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Godebert

I don’t blame any man’s errors on his ancestors.


80 posted on 06/22/2018 8:44:59 AM PDT by Mrs. Don-o (Whatever is pure, anything of excellence, and anything praiseworthy—keep thinking about these thing)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 79 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-89 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Religion
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson