Catholic Bishops against Arizona legislation

[fish90]

I’m so encouraged that the vast majority of the posts here are clearsighted, i.e., expressing the truth that the USA is not the welfare state of the world and that neither is she the Emergency Room to the world.

To criticize the opinion of the USCCB, and that of Bishop Mahony (calling those who disagree with amnesty ‘Nazis’ and ‘Communists’) is not to disrespect the episcopal authority of our Bishops. Far from it. Like the others on this post I am an obedient child of the Church when our Pope, Bishops, Cardinals and holy priests speak on matters of dogma, faith, and morals. But neither I nor any other Catholic is bound by the political opinions of Church heirarchy. The Az. law v. the illegal invasion fits into the latter, not the former, category.

As all of us know, there are in effect ‘2 Catholic Churches’. There is the ‘liberal’ Church which is fine with: bishops giving Holy Communion to gays in drag wearing ‘habits’ ridiculing real nuns youtube.com/watch?v=x_FDI1XX7js and ‘sisters’ selling their souls supporting Obamacare/abortion to get a pen from Obama’s signing of the bill a la Richard Rich betraying St. Thomas More at his trial: youtube.com/watch?v=bLIsqYKDqY8. In the liberal Church ‘social justice’ goes far beyond the charity we are bound as Catholics to give to those in need and extends to [supposedly] incurring sin if we demand border enforcement.

I’m not fooled-and judging from 99% of the posts here, neither are other Catholics like us.

I find JReducation has disputed such a mindset. When the Church finds moral errors in laws, She must respond.

Please rethink what you said about “2 Catholic Churches.”

Best,
fish90

 

[catharina]

I’m so encouraged that the vast majority of the posts here are clearsighted, i.e., expressing the truth that the USA is not the welfare state of the world and that neither is she the Emergency Room to the world.

To criticize the opinion of the USCCB, and that of Bishop Mahony (calling those who disagree with amnesty ‘Nazis’ and ‘Communists’) is not to disrespect the episcopal authority of our Bishops. Far from it. Like the others on this post I am an obedient child of the Church when our Pope, Bishops, Cardinals and holy priests speak on matters of dogma, faith, and morals. But neither I nor any other Catholic is bound by the political opinions of Church heirarchy. The Az. law v. the illegal invasion fits into the latter, not the former, category.

As all of us know, there are in effect ‘2 Catholic Churches’. There is the ‘liberal’ Church which is fine with: bishops giving Holy Communion to gays in drag wearing ‘habits’ ridiculing real nuns youtube.com/watch?v=x_FDI1XX7js and ‘sisters’ selling their souls supporting Obamacare/abortion to get a pen from Obama’s signing of the bill a la Richard Rich betraying St. Thomas More at his trial: youtube.com/watch?v=bLIsqYKDqY8. In the liberal Church ‘social justice’ goes far beyond the charity we are bound as Catholics to give to those in need and extends to [supposedly] incurring sin if we demand border enforcement.

I’m not fooled-and judging from 99% of the posts here, neither are other Catholics like us.

Reconsider the facts. There is only ONE Roman Catholic Church.
If you are among those who would seek to see “two” then that’s your problem.

Yes, there is divisiveness among Catholics.
The truly personal and ranting insults posted here reveal that.

The incident that involved a bishop giving the Eucharist to psuedo-nuns was explained by the bishop - he didn’t notice their outrageous dress and manner. I believe him, 100%. If you don’t believe him and think instead that he lied, then that is also your problem.

The “nuns” who jumped on the obamacare bandwagon have been widely reviled by CA posters. Check back for those threads. They were nearly 100% against the action of such “nuns.” If you hope to CAUSE diviseness you’re doing a good job with your post.

 

[catharina]

I find JReducation has disputed such a mindset. When the Church finds moral errors in laws, She must respond.

Please rethink what you said about "2 Catholic Churches."

Best,
fish90

I agree with you.
That statement might be the most preposterous and divisive I’ve read on CA.
It’s a call to divisiveness and should be retracted at once, because it is UN-true.

 

[canadianguy1143]

Hope you are able to soothe yourself soon.
I needn’t answer your questions when they should be directed to the governor.

My point?
Did the governor hear things the Bishops were stating.
Why yes, I do believe she did. You imagine otherwise? You prove it.

The governor’s unwise law passed and the ensuing upheaval was caused by her.

Please don’t think this post in anyway explains your actions. You stated on post #403 that the Governor seems to be taking the Bishop’s advice on her illegal immigration law. At the end you stated that it was too little too late.

Not knowing what you meant by “too little too late”, I asked if the law has taken effect and if people’s rights were being denied, which was one of the reasons given for those who oppose this law.

You said on #408 that I should ask the Governor. This was to put it politely very curious as it wasn’t the Governor who said “too little too late”. It was you. If you make a statement be prepared to back it up otherwise shut up.

I replied back that it wasn’t wise to be sarcastic and I said that I couldn’t, nor should I be required to, contact the Governor.

Then you get even more sarcastic on post #410 and repeat to me to write again to the Governor and you tell me to stop aiming my guns at me (whatever that meant).

At this point, I told you that it was your responsibility to back up what you say.

Then you try to misconstrue what I was asking of you when you said that I questioned that the Governor heard from the Bishops. Never once did I dispute that. I only asked that you prove that the Governor’s amendment was “too little too late”.

Still waiting for your response to that…

 

[tpw]

Good post! Unfortunately, Americans are very unaware of what the U.S. government does in their name in foreign countries. While Americans are very generous, what the government has done “in our name”( not simply Obama and the international abortion debate) but historically in many, many areas of foreign policy - is morally suspect at best.

As Chalmer’s Johnson observed in his book Backlash - their is in fact a backlash against such treatment by countries who have been adversely affected by US policy. To compound the tragedy is certain politicians and political commentators will scream in outrage (“you just hate America”) when members of the international community have been mistreated fight back. Because we are unfortunately profoundly unaware of foreign relations the public becomes easily manipulated by calculating interests - political or otherwise.

 

[Darryl1958]

sidbrown;6588165:

…
Make good immigration laws. Let Catholics push for good immigration laws. Immigration laws should protect the people from evil, regardless of where it comes from. Why do we as Catholics need to allow open borders to more abortionists and more pro abortion people? Why do we as Catholics need to allow same-sex married couples to cross the border? Why can’t we as Catholics take a position against all forms of evil, inside the country and outside the country, regardless of where it comes from?

If we truly believe what our faith tells us, that there is no greater sin against humanity than abortion, then we cannot close the border to Mexican drug peddlers and leave it open to abortionists. We should be telling our government that we want neither the drug peddlers nor the abortionists.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

Your argument seems to be since America has failed to act on the abortion and same sex marriage issues, then it has no moral reason to act against any other evil either.
Abortion and homosexuality are not crimes in America. Drug peddling still is.

Because Americans have failed to act against the greatest evil of our generation, how is it Catholic teaching that America must fail equally in acting against other forms of evil?

 

[catharina]

Hey Catholic lady, if you make an allegation that the Governor’s adjustment to the law is too little too late, its your Catholic OBLIGATION to prove it as otherwise its calumny and gossip.

Instead you want me to substantiate your allegation.

Since you refuse to answer my question (is the law in effect and are you aware of people who had their civil liberties denied), then I would have to say no.

Perhaps you should run for political office since you seem to think you can do a better job.

Here you go - again.

You accuse me of sarcasm - then are sarcastic. “Catholic Lady” is a new name for me.
You don’t like the name “Catharina” so you change my name? But no sarcasm? Sure.

My considered opinion is the Governor’s back-pedaling is ‘too little too late.’
You might hold a different opinion. So what?

The governor initially created a law that clearly allowed for the violation of civil rights.
Now she’s made adjustments to that law.
Can the revisions un-do the revulsion and fear that her law created?
No. It’s too little too late. That’s obvious by the need for and nature of the revisions.

You want to disagree with me. Fine. Who cares?
What was it you said to me? Do “cut the sarcasm … we’re adults.”
Think you can do that?

 

[pnewton]

I agree with you.
That statement might be the most preposterous and divisive I’ve read on CA.
It’s a call to divisiveness and should be retracted at once, because it is UN-true.

I don’t think we need to be too harsh. I am sure that the poster merely worded it poorly. As with all of America, there is a great divergent in opinion on the best way to get things done politically. This also occurs in the Church leadership. However, at the end of the day, all are a part of the same body of Christ, One Catholic Church.

 

[JReducation]

Your argument seems to be since America has failed to act on the abortion and same sex marriage issues, then it has no moral reason to act against any other evil either.
Abortion and homosexuality are not crimes in America. Drug peddling still is.

Because Americans have failed to act against the greatest evil of our generation, how is it Catholic teaching that America must fail equally in acting against other forms of evil?

My position is the other way around. Catholics have allowed this country to fail. If we are truly interested in abolishing evil, let’s do it right. Forget what the law says is legal or not legal, because the law can be very immoral, as you have correclty pointed out. We led the world into legalized abortion and now we’re following the UK, Canada and other nations toward same-sex marriage.

As Catholics we have to be grounded in moral law, before we can be grounded in civil law. Civil law is telling us that illegal immirgration is a crime and legislators are using the crimes of the few to push their argument. The moral Catholic position is to look at all evil, denounce all evil, including those evils that come into our country through the southern border.

We Catholics have to take a tougher position with legilators and demand that they secure the borders at both end and filter who arrives by boat, plane or any other means. Because if we exclude the Mexicans, poor and criminal alike, but welcome the abortionist and the gay agenda with open arms, then we’re being inconsistent in our application of moral law.

The Church is not opposed to tough immigration laws. The Church is for tough laws against all kinds of evil. This is the role of all Catholics who vote in any country, to inform and demand from their government that evil be condemned and that it not be allowed into the country, be it the USA or any other.

We do not welcome drug trafficers, but we do not welcome abortionists and gay rights people either. But the current policy that we have is not based on moral reason. It’s based on convenience. When that happens, it is the duty of the Church to point it out. This was made very clear in Gaudium et Spes. The Church stands as a teacher to government, not the other way around.

What some people in our government want to do is to close off the Mexican border, because of the economic and criminal problems that our horrible immigration policies pose. But the same people who are sounding off on the economic and criminal problems causes by illegal immigration are the ones who allowed terrorists to enter the USA legally, because they had money in the bank. If you approach any American embassy in the world and you prove that you have money to spend, you can get a visa to enter the USA. I know this for a fact, because I grew up the son of a diplomat who als served as an ambassador. I saw how the embassies work.

Here is what is happening now. They want to close off the Mexican door, because of crime and economic problems. This is not a bad idea, if it done properly. But they are saying nothing about continuing the open door policy to Canadians and Brits without visas. When the Church looks at this, she has to denounce the injustice, because a nation that kills its unborn is guilty of far greater crimes against humanity than one that sells drugs. Since we should always strive for the greater good, we must challenge the government to filter out as much evil as possible, from every port, not just the south.

The concern is not about allowing in drug dealings from the south. It’s about allowing in every kind of criminal, from north and south. This is what Catholics need to say to government. These things are all crimes and we don’t want them in our country. How are we going to clean up the moral mess in our country, if we continue to welcome immorality?

The best way to minimize dust in your house is to close your doors and windows. Then you can clean inside and it will stay cleaner.

Let’s not just fight against drugs and street gangsters, while we forget the most serious and dangerous criminal of all, the abortionist. Catholics have a moral duty to demand that the government address all of the evil that it allows to enter our country. The argument that abortion and homosexuality are legal in the USA is not morally justifiable. Because the law that makes them legal is an immoral law. Therefore, it is not binding on Catholics. We do not have to view these things as having a right to exist in our country, just because someone says that it is legal. We have an obligation to demand that our government clean up the country from border to border.

I hope this clarifies what I’m trying to say here. This is a matter of implementing the Gospel of Life. All life is sacred from conception to natural death. It’s not just the life that is lost in a street shoot-out that is sacred.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[JReducation]

I don’t think we need to be too harsh. I am sure that the poster merely worded it poorly. As with all of America, there is a great divergent in opinion on the best way to get things done politically. This also occurs in the Church leadership. However, at the end of the day, all are a part of the same body of Christ, One Catholic Church.

If we want to get really technical here, there are 22 Catholic Churches that make up the Universal Church. But there is only one Roman Church. There is a power struggle between some members of that Roman Church, but that does not make us two Churches. What that makes us is a bunch of brats, on both sides, who can’t sit down and settle problems without a food fight.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[sidbrown]

Dear Sidbrown, whatever you wrote above does not condone that you have the right to generalize and judge a person by his/her race. I do not like to fight, but, i can also answer you the way you just answer me, not because i want revenge but because maybe in that way you can feel and meditate what it means to be judged in a generalized way. Therefore, i will say and claim that "all americans are drug addicts, killers, promiscuous, explotation, etc?
How does that feel? and i told you before, i am not a person that likes to hurt people, it is even against my own profession and moral values, but i did it just to make you feel the pain and meditate about the danger of making such kind of comments in a generalized way.
From the bottom of my heart i advise you to be more humble and have a wider mental approach when you judge not a person, but a country or race.
When we are so self centered that we can not see beyond our own eyes and we can not accept that so many times we are wrong and we can not grow mentally and spiritually.
I believe our franciscan brother reEducation has a wider knowledge, experience and better approach on such moral and political issues.
Let’s not forget that if we only see earthy things we can not see God’s laws which are our ultimately goal on this earth. We are here on earth in a transitory way but our main goal should be to live the way Jesus told us to live, in order for us to be near our Lord in heaven.

Thank you again, for reading this post and may God bless you and guide you.

I believe that you are bringing in “race” here. Let us be objective and look at the situation in Europe. Taking a particular country, some foreigners are allowed to enter without visas and other foreigners are required to have visas for entry. This has been going on for many, many years and I don’t see where any Pope has ever declared that this practice is a mortal sin. Please show me where a Pope has said that this practice is immoral or sinful. It is a prudential decision by the political leaders of a country and you are free as a Catholic to agree or disagree with this. So it is very wrong for anyone to say well, if you agree with this practice, you have to leave the Catholic Church.

 

[mark_a]

(2) U.S. employers will have to answer to Jesus for the same, since undercutting wages for the employers’ selfish gain also deprives U.S. struggling workers from obtaining work in the construction industry, for example, where thousands of non-immigrant workers want work and are qualified to obtain work; Jesus will have harsh words for such employers; just read Matthew, the Gospel parables, etc.

DIng ding ding ding. We have a winner.
There are a lot of people making a lot of money off the backs of illegal immigrants.

 

[catharina]

I don’t think we need to be too harsh. I am sure that the poster merely worded it poorly. As with all of America, there is a great divergent in opinion on the best way to get things done politically. This also occurs in the Church leadership. However, at the end of the day, all are a part of the same body of Christ, One Catholic Church.

I will hope that you’re correct,
that the poster made a very poor choice of words.

Still it’s unnerving and distressing to read that ANYONE claims that
Roman Catholicism is now composed of two Churches. It’s possible that
such a claim could lead to the very thing suggested: Christ’s Body divided.

 

[lelhajj]

I believe that you are bringing in “race” here. Let us be objective and look at the situation in Europe. Taking a particular country, some foreigners are allowed to enter without visas and other foreigners are required to have visas for entry. This has been going on for many, many years and I don’t see where any Pope has ever declared that this practice is a mortal sin. Please show me where a Pope has said that this practice is immoral or sinful. It is a prudential decision by the political leaders of a country and you are free as a Catholic to agree or disagree with this. So it is very wrong for anyone to say well, if you agree with this practice, you have to leave the Catholic Church.

I believe we are talking about different things. I was trying to tell you that you did wrong in generalizing that all mexicans are uncivilized and indecent. I believe, in my last post i made that clear.
If you do not want to admit that, well, what can i tell you? As i have already proved you, i am a mexican born, married to an american citizen, therefore i am american now. I am not uncivilized and certainly not indecent, therefore, do not generalize when you make comments about a race.
By the same token, i can not say that all americans are wise, drug addicts, etc.
we might say: some americans are wise, drug addicts, etc.
we can not even say; the majority of americans are wise, etc. because unless you have the numbers or percentage of the population, you can make such a statement.
About your request to show you about where the Pope… etc, i believe, this does not have anything to do with what i already told you above.

 

[JReducation]

I fail to understand why people keep bringing up the pope and visas into this argument. No one has said that you cannot have visas. Everyone is saying that immigration laws have to be fair.

I think Pope John Paul II said it best. “Human life is sacred from conception to natural death.” Therefore, every human being must be treated with respect, justice and charity. Every human being must be protected, regardless of where he is from or where he lives. That person’s life is sacred. No one has the right to do anything that intentionally harms another person, whether you’re a foreigner or a national. Finally, when creating laws, all laws must treat people equitably.

Next, what is criminal is not necessarily sinful. Therefore, we have to be very careful not to assume that criminal and sinful mean the same thing. As I said before, in Muslim countries it is a crime to convert to Christianity or Judaism. But we know this is not sinful. Therefore, it’s an unjust law.

On the flip side, what is legal is not necessarily moral. We know this from aboriton, infanticide, fetal stemp cell research, euthanasia and many other horrible things that are legal.

The conclusion is that we cannot trust government to decide what is moral. We must tell government what is moral. To do so, we must know what the Church considers moral. Then we take that to government and we demand that government comply with the faith. The faith must always have the upper hand, neve the state over the faith. The state has not been given the mission to preach the faith. It has been given the mission to govern morally for the good of all.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[gakroeger]

JReducation

You have caused me to rethink the critical comments I have made on this thread and others reminding us to remain respectful and I appreciate your thoughful and wise comments. A ways back on this thread (I think it was this thread) I posted a link to a video by Father Corapi entited “Death Wish” in this video, father Corapi mentioned the majority of bishops in Canada went very public and even put in writing their disagreement with Pope Paul VI on Humanae Vitae. I do not remember this event, however, it must have been shortly after the release of Humanae Vitae in I believe it was 1968. Father Corapi referred to it as the Winnipeg Statement. I also understand that Canadian Catholics have asked the Bishops to withdraw their statement. Do you know the current status and what is your opinion on this issue since you seem to be the Bishops advocate on the current issue.

Here is the link again…

aipnews.com/talk/forums/thread-view.asp?tid=722&posts=11

 

[JReducation]

Gakroeger:

I don’t consider myself to be the bishops’ advocate. I’m simply a Franciscan Brother of Life doing what is my vocation, defending life from the womb to the tomb. As our Holy Father Francis taught us, by his own example, defending life sometimes means that we have to take a beating. This happened to him when he defended the lepers and the victims of the Fifth Crusade. Our Holy Father taught me that it is not a man’s national heritage that determines whom we protect, but the dignity that is bestowed on him by his Heavenly Father. Therefore, he was a defender of the victims, both Muslim and Christians. If repelling the enemy meant violating the laws of peace and justice, he wanted no part of it. When he appears before the Sultan, the Sultan asked him if he had come as an emissary of the Christians and Francis answered, “I have come as an emissary of Jesus Christ.” Notice that he does not deny the Christians or the Church, but he does not identify himself with those who were waging war either. This does not mean that Francis was not Catholic, for there has never been a more Catholic man in the history of the Church, as recorded in three papal encyclicals.

Many have spoken out about bishops getting involved in politics. But we forget someone like Francis of Assisi who tried to bring peace between two warring factions. To bring some peace, he made compromises with the Muslims. The Sultan offered to let his friars pass through his territory, if they promised not to evangelize the Muslims or the Jews. Francis agreed that they would not SPEAK to them about Christianity. Little did the Sultan known that Francis and his brothers spoke without words, but with actions of men of conscience. This has earned them the respect and trust of the Muslims, Jews and Christians in the Holy Land. They have been there for 800 years without any interruption. That’s the school from which I come.

In addition to this, our Holy Father also taught me that the college of the Apostles remains holy, even when the apostles sin. It remains essential to our faith, even when they do things that scandalize or offend us. He has taught me that without a bishop I can go to hell. Only a bishop can ordain a priest to give me absolution. Only a bishop can give that priest faculties to absolve my sins. The Church can provide those faculties in an emergency, but only if there is a validly ordained priest to receive the faculties. So we go back to the necessity of the bishop and the importance of his role, not only in our daily lives, but more importantly in the salvation of our immortal soul. The role of the bishop is more important than that of any other person in our lives. Our spouses, our children and our parents, cannot grant us absolution. They cannot secure our communion with the Church, not even your parish priest can do that. We are in communion with the Church only when we are in communion with our bishop. Despite our opinions about what they say, we must never forget that they are the most powerful persons in our lives. We must ask ourselves, how does God view our hostility toward his apostles?

Yes, the Bishops of Canada made a horrible mistake in their statement. But as St. Francis would say to us, there are two things that have to be considered here. First, let us not forget who they are. They are the apostles. Second, let us remember that we are not to judge them, they are to judge us. Because the power to govern is not given to us, it is only given to a bishop. So Francis would advise us to let the Holy Father resolve this issue. If you know what the Holy Father wants, follow it, but do not, under any circumstances allow yourself to think any less of the bishop or to treat him with any less honor than you would treat Peter and Paul. Francis reminds us that those who knew Peter and Paul did not have the same exalted opinion of them that we have today. We only see the product of their ministry. Those who lived with them saw their humanity and their weaknesses. He asks us, would we dishonor Peter and Paul, if we knew about the private lives or about their weaknesses and sins? So then, we must treat every bishop as we would Peter and Paul, because these weak and frail men are their descendents.

Have the bishops of Canada publicly retracted their statement? I don’t know. Do I need to know? No. The matter is between the Holy Father and his bishops. As long as I know what the Holy Father wants, I have my map and I can follow Jesus. I do know this. They were proven wrong by God himself. God did not need man to do it. Today, Canada’s Catholic Church is fighting against abortion, infanticide, same-sex marriage and discrete forms of euthanasia. As Fr. Corapi says, the greatest form of evil in the world. If I had more Brothers of Life, more men to do this work, I have a wonderful mission for them. Put them on the borders to preach the Gospel of Life, to convert those who would do harm to each other and who would threaten human dignity. I would also send them on missions to visit legislators to ask for review of all alliances that we have with the culture of death, inside and outside our country. We cannot clean house by sweeping the front room and forgetting the back porch. This is not politics. This is Franciscan spirituality taught to us by Francis of Assisi himself. He knew that he could not clean up the mess that was the Church unless he began with the protection of human life. If this meant standing between the governments of two warring factions, he didn’t care what anyone called him, politician, reformer, heretic, insane or saint.

When you commit to the Gospel of Life, all of life is sacred and everyone who threatens life must be converted or sent away so as not to poison the waters more than they already are.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[sidbrown]

I believe we are talking about different things. I was trying to tell you that you did wrong in generalizing that all mexicans are uncivilized and indecent. I believe, in my last post i made that clear.
If you do not want to admit that, well, what can i tell you? As i have already proved you, i am a mexican born, married to an american citizen, therefore i am american now. I am not uncivilized and certainly not indecent, therefore, do not generalize when you make comments about a race.
By the same token, i can not say that all americans are wise, drug addicts, etc.
we might say: some americans are wise, drug addicts, etc.
we can not even say; the majority of americans are wise, etc. because unless you have the numbers or percentage of the population, you can make such a statement.
About your request to show you about where the Pope… etc, i believe, this does not have anything to do with what i already told you above.

You are misrepresenting what I wrote. I never wrote what you claim: “that all mexicans are uncivilized and indecent”, so stop telling stories. You are misquoting and misrpresenting me, which is wrong.
the facts are as I said them to be with reference to visas. Take for example, the country of Italy. Italy does not require a visa for a foreigner with French citizenship. It does require a visa for a foreigner with Cambodian citizenship entering from Cambodia. And it is similar for all European countries. Some foreigners require a visa to enter, whereas other foreigners do not. Give me a declaration by any Pope who has ever said that it is a mortal sin or in any way immoral for a Catholic to support this type of immigration law.

 

[JReducation]

You are misrepresenting what I wrote. I never wrote what you claim: “that all mexicans are uncivilized and indecent”, so stop telling stories.

My friend, you were responding to me and you said, “At least Canadians and Brits are civilized and decent people.” I was asking how it was fair to close the Mexican border to allow the Canadians and Brits free access to our country.

I was coming from the same place as Fr. Corapi in this video above, the dignity of all human life.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

 

[gakroeger]

JReducation

Thanks for your response. I agree with all you say, here is another video on the Winnipeg Statement by Father Corapi….

Is Father Corapi being disrespectful of the Canadian Bishops? He first says that rapist and murders have a higher place in hell than these Bishops unless they repent, then he states that he has the highest respect for the Bishops and their positions and how difficult their jobs are; that Satin must be after them in an aggressive way. Do you think Father Corapi is judging these Bishops? Is Father Corapi acting as St. Catherine of Siena would have? It sounds like a tight wire act. We are not to Judge but we are also not to remain silent in the face of evil. I know the answer, love the sinner, hate the sin; but it is difficult to do sometimes. No wonder the gate is narrow and few are able to pass through.

In this video Father Corapi hits the Bishops pretty hard and I think rightly so. Do you believe he right? Has he gone too far? Apparently the Canadian Bishops have not withdrawn their statement yet, I read a 2008 letter to the Bishops by the Canadian laity requesting them to withdraw the statement. Since this was over 40 years ago many of these Bishop are probably dead.

youtube.com/watch?v=jo0ElZMS7EY