USCCB Condemns Separating Immigrant Children from Families

[Sarcelle]

I’ve had a collection company come after me but no arrest.

Luckily I was able to talk to the collection company and they were pretty reasonable. When I told them I was a victim of identity theft they did not seem at all surprised.

I agree. Young Hispanic men who are here legally or who are born here are the victims of identity theft due to illegal immigration. Yet more people are ignorant of this fact and seem to be more in sympathy with illegal immigration which fuels the identity theft racket.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Young Hispanic men who are here legally or who are born here are the victims of identity theft due to illegal immigration. Yet more people are ignorant of this fact and seem to be more in sympathy with illegal immigration which fuels the identity theft racket.

It really is a problem for them, and they guard their ID pretty closely. I have had lawyers tell me they have had to defend young Hispanic men against child support claims and criminal charges because of identity theft. It appears to happen to them more than anyone else.

 

[pnewton]

Four.

If you think it was only four, then perhaps that explains your view.

It wasn’t. The initial statement, by Cardinal Dinardo, was issued from the USCCB at a bi-annual meeting. It was from him because he is the president of the Conference. Making such statements is one of the canonical roles of a national conference of bishops. (Canon 447)

 

[Ridgerunner]

If you think it was only four, then perhaps that explains your view.

It wasn’t. The initial statement, by Cardinal Dinardo, was issued from the USCCB at a bi-annual meeting. It was from him because he is the president of the Conference. Making such statements is one of the canonical roles of a national conference of bishops. (Canon 447)

Oh? Do you have a record of the members present or the vote tally? How about a copy of the resolution?

Of course not. It doesn’t take any kind of resolution for one of the officers of the USCCB to issue his opinions on USCCB letterhead. However, for any USCCB pronouncement to be binding on Catholics, it has to be by vote of the majority of ALL bishops, then endorsed by the Vatican.

The reason almost all USCCB statements are by one or two members is that they can’t get a vote at a meeting of all bishops, or a Vatican endorsement for a personal point of view.

 

[pnewton]

However, for any USCCB pronouncement to be binding on Catholics, it has to be by vote of the majority of ALL bishops, then endorsed by the Vatican.

Your use of the word “binding” is a misunderstanding of the pastoral role of bishops’ conferences. It is not possible to answer questions that do not reflect the way the Church works.

 

[Mi_Rose]

What did your Bishop say? Mine supported the statement.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Your use of the word “binding” is a misunderstanding of the pastoral role of bishops’ conferences. It is not possible to answer questions that do not reflect the way the Church works.

Are you really saying nothing the USCCB resolves can be binding in conscience on Catholics? If so, you’re terribly, terribly incorrect. It is possible, but only in the circumstances I described. Anything else is just the personal opinion of the writer.

 

[Ridgerunner]

What did your Bishop say? Mine supported the statement.

Which statement are you asking about? There’s more than one of them.

 

[Mi_Rose]

The statement put out by Bishop DiNardo as the position of the USCCB.

 

[Ridgerunner]

The statement put out by Bishop DiNardo as the position of the USCCB.

There are a lot of immigration letters by Bishop DiNardo. I don’t recall him attributing any to the USCCB as a body, but I’ll look for that if you tell me WHICH DiNardo immigration letter you’re talking about.

 

[Mi_Rose]

A Statement from Daniel Cardinal DiNardo | USCCB

This one

 

[blackforest]

Opposition to family separation isn’t confined to the USCCB. The Pope has spoken out against it. Also, head to your favorite search engine. Enter “diocese” “separating” “families” and “border.” Look over the long list of bishops coming out against family separations.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I can’t find where he ever addressed that particular statement. Looking at the public record of that particular meeting of bishops, it does not appear Bp. DiNardo’s statement was ever voted on.

Opposition to family separation isn’t confined to the USCCB. The Pope has spoken out against it. Also, head to your favorite search engine. Enter “diocese” “separating” “families” and “border.” Look over the long list of bishops coming out against family separations.

I don’t think I have ever met a single person who favors “family separation” unless there is a good reason for it. Some, of course, work with families (like DFS workers) and do plenty of “family separation”.

But I don’t think anybody favors it for its own sake.

 

[blackforest]

Bishops nationwide are specifically and unequivocally speaking out against the federal government detaining and separating asylee and immigrant families at the border. They clearly do not consider seeking asylum or crossing the border without proper documents “a good reason.” Can you name a Roman Catholic bishop who does?

We’re bringing this to your attention because you previously made it sound like only four bishops stood up in opposition.

 

[Mi_Rose]

I did not say it was voted on. I said my Bishop supported it and asked if yours did.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Bishops nationwide are specifically and unequivocally speaking out against the federal government detaining and separating asylee and immigrant families at the border. They clearly do not consider seeking asylum or crossing the border without proper documents “a good reason.” Can you name a Roman Catholic bishop who does?

No. Neither have you provided me with the name of any bishop who has forwarded an alternative plan. Bishops have a tendency, and perhaps rightly, to point out their moral positions on certain things. But rarely do they propose any resolutions. To my understanding, no bishop has said what he thinks the government ought to do to resolve the issues related to illegal entrants who claim asylum only when caught and whose connection to a minor in their company is doubtfully theirs, or the accompanying adult is not fit to have custody of the minor, as is the case with a significant number of these minors.

Those things are for the government to work out, and properly so.

 

[Ridgerunner]

I did not say it was voted on. I said my Bishop supported it and asked if yours did.

I have looked to see if he did, and find nothing. He might have. But he might not have. This diocese is very, very conservative politically, and he might not have thought Bp DiNardo’s statement fully matches his own thoughts about such thing. They don’t all have to think the same thing when it comes to political issues. Since DiNardo’s statement was never put into a resolution or passed, it may be most bishops didn’t feel it quite expressed their own thinking. Probably we’ll never know.

But Bp DiNardo’s statement was presented to the USCCB. It just didn’t result in anything being done by the whole body.

 

[Ender]

Of course not. It doesn’t take any kind of resolution for one of the officers of the USCCB to issue his opinions on USCCB letterhead. However, for any USCCB pronouncement to be binding on Catholics, it has to be by vote of the majority of ALL bishops, then endorsed by the Vatican.

To be officially approved by the USCCB a statement requires approval by two-thirds of the bishops, at which point (I believe) it can be sent to the Vatican for their approval. Absent that, no statement from the “USCCB” carries any official weight. As pnewton said, however, even then such statements are not binding. This is because they are prudential judgments and not statements of the church’s moral doctrines. The application of the doctrines in particular instances requires judgments that are rarely morally obvious…even when bishops offer their opinions.

 

[pnewton]

it can be sent to the Vatican for their approval

The Vatican neither approves or disapproves such resolutions. The application of Catholic doctrine to a specific nation is the role of national bishop conferences. The Vatican does approve variances to the liturgy, though, in this manner.

 

[pnewton]

The problem is that every argument here by conservatives for rejecting this condemnation could hold for any liberal to reject the legalization of something morally evil, like abortion or gay marriage. How we treat moral evils within the law is also a matter of prudence. That is why missing Mass (and other mortal sins) are not crimes.