Get Ready to Call Your Representative and Senator on Monday 2/26

[Ender]

These are not political solutions. They make no mention of what a bill would look like, for instance in terms of negotiated border security, etc. These are goals. How these goal are achieved is still open to the political process.

How finely you slice these distinctions. Requiring a bill to include protection from deportation and a path to citizenship are clearly political solutions. These are in fact considerations that are part of the overall dialog: build a wall (y/n), end chain migration (y/n), deport “dreamers” (y/n), end the immigration lottery (y/n), grant citizenship (y/n), require EVerify (y/n). I didn’t say they wrote a bill; what they did was to say what any such bill should contain.

I think the “us” referred to the bishops. That is confirmed by the next sentence, “We have done so continually” where “we” seems to refer to the bishops again. The bishops are not claiming a doctrinal obligation on all the faithful. They are explaining why they are issuing this call.

And is our faith different than their faith, or should we reasonably assume that “our” faith actually means the Catholic faith? And if it means the Catholic faith is calling us to do something how would not doing what Catholicism calls us to do not be a moral failure…that is, a sin?

 

[Mavzylor]

No comprende…

 

[Ender]

Edit: Actually it seems it was a joint statement from the president, vice president, and chairman of migration on behalf of the USCCB. I think the original statement is accurate.

No bishop gets to speak for another bishop. This statement is from three bishops. The fact that it was issued through the USCCB doesn’t change that. Individual bishops may or may not support the statement, but that is for each of them to decide.

 

[TheLittleLady]

There is no pending legislation that would do away with abortion. When there is, I am sure the USCCB will organize efforts to support it.

For now, the great, on going work done by the USCCB to respect life from conception til natural death continues.

 

[Mavzylor]

Hmmm… well I don’t think hundreds of bishops would fit around the microphone where they released the statement. That’s probably why they had only 3 represent them.

 

[Mavzylor]

There is pending legislation that works towards outlawing abortion. What you are saying doesn’t make sense. It’s like saying they shouldn’t worry about DACA, they should only worry about whether we outlaw all immigration or not.

 

[Ender]

Hmmm… well I don’t think hundreds of bishops would fit around the microphone where they released the statement. That’s probably why they had only 3 represent them.

Was I unclear before? No bishop may speak for another. The USCCB cannot issue a statement in the name of all the bishops unless all the individual bishops have in fact stated their support.

 

[Mavzylor]

Yes, now I see where your original use of the “trivial” descriptor comes into play. Sorry I brought it up for discussion.

Edit: I guess I just assume the majority are in agreement, since I also assume the president, vice president, and chair were elected by the majority. I understand that you know and agree with your own Bishop’s position. I still don’t believe there is anything wrong with saying the USCCB declared this Call-In Day, instead of clarifying that 3 Bishops released the statement, when it was chosen leaders of the USCCB.

 

[mVitus]

I’ll point out that on Twitter, the USCB is posting about the Call In directly from itself in addition to retweeting bishops. If it were just the bishops, I’d imagine they would’ve only retested if even that. But by directly tweeting in favor of it, that is the USCB as a whole voicing support for the call in.

 

[pnewton]

I haven’t noticed, but will resist assuming you’re just saying that because you’re too apt to straddle the fence.

I have been accused of that. I to not like polarity. The buzz words and labels that Republicans and Democrats use to polarize this nation will keep America from being more than a house divided. President Trump will fail at trying to make America great unless he wakes up and realizes that America is more than the 40% who support him.

 

[Ender]

I still don’t believe there is anything wrong with saying the USCCB declared this Call-In Day, instead of clarifying that 3 Bishops released the statement, when it was chosen leaders of the USCCB.

As a fact of the matter, the notice was issued by the USCCB so it is certainly proper to make that claim. What is unfortunate about saying it that way, however, is that too many people will misunderstand what that actually means. Many will refer to this document as something the church has said, which is even beyond “the US bishops said”, and all of which is well beyond what the document actually represents.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

LeafByNiggle:

I think the “us” referred to the bishops. That is confirmed by the next sentence, “We have done so continually” where “we” seems to refer to the bishops again. The bishops are not claiming a doctrinal obligation on all the faithful. They are explaining why they are issuing this call.

And is our faith different than their faith, or should we reasonably assume that “our” faith actually means the Catholic faith? And if it means the Catholic faith is calling us to do something how would not doing what Catholicism calls us to do not be a moral failure…that is, a sin?

It is one and the same faith that compels some people to become missionaries, some people to become ordained, some people to march against abortion, some people to teach CCD, some people to take communion to the sick, some people to sing in the choir, some people to work on Loaves and Fishes, etc. The bishops are letting us know what their faith compels them to do and they are doing it.

Mavzylor:

Edit: Actually it seems it was a joint statement from the president, vice president, and chairman of migration on behalf of the USCCB. I think the original statement is accurate.

No bishop gets to speak for another bishop. This statement is from three bishops. The fact that it was issued through the USCCB doesn’t change that. Individual bishops may or may not support the statement, but that is for each of them to decide.

Your insinuation that this statement does not represent the bishops but is only the opinion of three bishops is a huge stretch. As I posted before, our bishop, Bernhard Hebda, gave an impassioned call for this very project in his remarks at the end of mass that he just happened to be celebrating at our parish. You are exaggerating a division between our bishops that just isn’t there. You can’t seriously believe that any of the US bishops were unaware of this statement, or that, being aware, they still chose not to voice their strong objection to it? The most you could say is that perhaps some bishops were less “compelled” than others, but it don’t think it is reasonable to dismiss this statement as the work of only a few.

 

[TheOldColonel]

Likely, you feel the same way about your neighborhood.

 

[Maximilian75]

not at all… we have a lot of space in which housing could be built and a fair amount of businesses that could hire them.

 

[philipl]

Okay, JetteZ, tell us exactly how many people you would let in to immigrate every year into the US. How are you going to differentiate - - you can’t let in all the people that would like to come here!

It is unreasonable to demand an answer to this weirdly specific question as the price to hold a view that a DACA person should be allowed to stay here.

The answer for me is easy. go back to pre 1963 immigration laws. Now if the government removed all welfare programs, ended SS and medicare, ended student loans and any government handouts. then yes, open the borders to all that want to come.

 

[philipl]

so Trump has said dreamer may stay but it would take 10 to 12 years for them to become citizens. This is for 1.8 million Dreamers. However there would be disqualifies based upon their school history and criminal backgrounds. However he wants an end to chain migration and the diversity visa lottery program. He doesnt want any changes to the H-1B visa plan however the wall also has to be built. So this plan 100% allows the dreamers to stay and one day become citizens. Seems to me everyone is getting what they want, why are the dems against it. (The sound you hear is crickets)

 

[Kei]

Is it fine if I contacted but did not call? I asked to go with the hardline bill as a balanced approach

 

[SuperLuigi]

For now, the great, on going work done by the USCCB to respect life from conception til natural death continues.

I disagree. They aren’t pushing the GOP hard enough or encouraging pro-life Democrats to run. They shouldn’t endorse specific candidates but need to let people know these issues transcend political parties.

And their lack of discourse on ‘climate change’ is nothing short of shameful.

 

[Theo520]

First, Rush Limbaugh said in no uncertain terms that he would be ok with amnisty for every single undocumented foreigner living here as long as they could not vote for 15-20 years.

Second, what is your position in the Republican Catholic Church? (Motto: “Republican First, Catholic Second!”) County Alderman?

Rush is a media personality who says things to make a point, and tries to be controvesial. I disagree with him on what you quoted since it would only encourage more economic migrants to come here illegally.

The ‘Republican Catholic Church’ seems to be a strawman invention, an effective debating tool though. Both liberals and conservatives can proof text doctrine that supports their positions or even appears to contradict statements by Church figures.

My personal feeling on the Pope?
He’s not doing his job correctly,

he should be actively pushing the church teaching on subsidiarity. His primary focus should be on whether the Catholic Bishops in Latin America are doing all that they can to improve the lives of their brethren. Where they need help, we in the North should answer the call. Too much of what I hear from the Pope seems to put the primary responsibility on the US, when Catholics in Mexico should be in the lead for any efforts and reform.

Historically, the Church does have a strong history of coexisting with bad governance rather than actively pushing for reform. I realize it’s a difficult balancing act, but the Church has tended to lean in supporting the status quo.

 

[TheOldColonel]

Then go for it.