Posted on 07/19/2018 4:42:01 AM PDT by marshmallow
Illinois bishop openly rejects USCCB position on Supreme Court's Janus v. AFSCME
SPRINGFIELD, Ill. (ChurchMilitant.com) - An American bishop is voicing his disagreement with an official statement from the American bishops' conference.
On June 27, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that public sector employees cannot be required to pay fees for labor unions that they don't want to be a part of. The case, Janus v. AFSCME, had an Illinois state employee arguing that he should not be forced to pay union dues on the grounds that the union was giving money to political organizations with agendas contrary to his own politics.
The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) expressed disappointment with the High Court's decision. Bishop Frank J. Dewane of Venice, Chairman of the USCCB's Committee on Domestic Justice and Human Development, said in a USCCB statement dated June 27, "It is disappointing that today's Supreme Court ruling renders the long-held view of so many bishops constitutionally out-of-bounds, and threatens to 'limit the freedom or negotiating capacity of labor unions' (Caritas in Veritate, no. 25)."
Bishop Thomas Paprocki released a video on July 5 arguing against the USCCB's position and in favor of the Supreme Court's ruling. After explaining the Catholic position on labor unions, Bp. Paprocki said, "In this regard, then, unions should not expect the unquestionable support of the Church when their objectives are contrary to the duties of religion and morality.
He continued, "Today, a number of unions actively promote abortion rights. Three of the nation's biggest unions, including AFSCME, contributed $435,000 to the nation's largest abortion provider, Planned Parenthood, in 2014."
"Forcing public employees to subsidize unions that promote such immoral policies and activities is just not right," he added.
(Excerpt) Read more at churchmilitant.com ...
I first read his name as “Pop-Rocki.” My first thought was that he should not drink Diet Coke. He would explode.
One of the things that continually surprise me is that the downstate IL bishops are very good.
Another that continues to surprise me is just how horrible the Iowa ones are.
And this is from the outside listening to friends and family talk. When my MIL was visiting, the local priest blasted this same USSC decision saying it was a “mortal sin”.
Sounds like Rome needs a thorough house cleaning.
So the bishops would prefer civil servants to pay under coercion union dues to fund abortion rights and “LGBT” rights promotion and other anti-Catholic left wing stuff?
There’s a vast difference in average Catholics and these bishops. The average Catholic believes in protecting your borders, does not believe in “global warming”, does not believe in making workers join unions, etc. The average bishop believes in just the opposite because the average bishop is nothing more than a democrat operative with a funny looking hat on. The average bishop is an embarrassment to Catholics that actually live the faith.
So do many churches.
You got that right!
I know my church hasn’t issued a declaration in favor of unions nor do we sweep homosexual ministers under the rug or shuffle them around from place to place.
I see sadly a lot of division between clergy and lay people.
Even so, the churches have fallen asleep on the job.
We need another Polish Pope.
Or Eastern Europe for that matter.
Or Eastern Europe for that matter.
Bishops should be focusing on Catholic teaching. The Church is quite clear on many subjects, including immigration in a way that is quite reasonable.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church, in paragraph 2241 spells out the Church's position on immigration. While it acknowledges that wealthy nations should help the less fortunate in the spirit of charity, it understands that there are reasonable limits to doing so and responsibilities for the immigrant to the host nation (my emphasis in bold):
2241 The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.
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.
The statement is pretty clear. Countries have the right to take reasonable and prudent measures to control who enters the country, as resources permit and to preserve the spiritual heritage of the country.
Bishops should be focusing on that and not playing politics. Many government programs have created a situation of "strange bedfellows" where Churches are concerned, especially when money is dangled in front of Churches as an incentive to flood the USA with immigrants.
Pastoral malpractice, and classic corrupt clericalism. He ought to get a LOT of blowback on that.
What church is that?
If your pastor bad-mouths Janus, leave him a note in the collection on your decision to withhold some of the extra cash in the paycheck. Better yet, withhold the entire amount you typically donate. He doesn't support you having that money to start with, and he obviously supports entities that promote abortion, abortion- socialism-promoting politicians, and stands against your Natural Rights. The latter of which pretty well stands against Church teaching.
When you have them by the wallet, their hearts and minds will follow.
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.