jump to navigation

US Bishops Oppose Appeal of Johnson Amendment – Why? March 7, 2017

Posted by Tantumblogo in abdication of duty, different religion, Endless Corruption, episcopate, error, foolishness, General Catholic, It's all about the $$$, scandals, secularism, self-serving, sickness, Society, the struggle for the Church, unbelievable BS.
trackback

I saw the following excerpt of a lengthy interview Archbishop Lori gave to the Catholic Register recently on the subject of the new presidency and the prospects it brings to the Church, and in addition to being generally disappointed with the bishop’s general view of much of the Trump agenda he was queried about, I was very surprised by this particular excerpt:

What is your assessment of the president’s proposal to eliminate the Johnson Amendment?

That’s, of course, a very complex question. We would certainly want to see, more specifically, what the president might have in mind. As a general rule, it is not a good idea for churches to engage in partisan politics. I believe that, generally, that proves to be a great distraction from our central task and mission, which is to preach the Gospel. Furthermore, I think it would have a tendency to unnecessarily divide our congregations.

I would recognize that the Johnson Amendment is lived out fairly unevenly, across religious lines, but in general, I think we would eye the adjustment of this amendment warily. I think that’s the best adverb I can give you. We are looking at this carefully and warily.

The Johnson Amendment, for those who don’t know, was something created by the corrupt, racist Lyndon Johnson in 1954 and tacked onto a defense appropriations bill to punish the churches who had opposed his 1952 candidacy to the US Senate from Texas.  Johnson only won by literally manufacturing votes in magical ballot boxes, but he had faced criticism from various churches for some of his stands and he did not want to have to deal with that again.  So, he created an amendment that churches that endorse or oppose specific candidates would lose their precious tax-exempt status.  The amendment was shockingly non-controversial at the time, but it has had enormous ramifications.

Now why would the bishops not favor being freed from this restriction on their ability to speak freely and endorse the most moral, most worthy candidates, and oppose those who are unworthy?  There are two reasons, really – money, and ideology.

Regarding the money, the USCCB – and Lori was speaking in at least a semi-official capacity for the USCCB in this interview – is wholly dependent on federal funding for almost all of their activities, activities which have come to be thoroughly politicized by this very same funding.  Something like 90% of Catholic Charities and 92% of Catholic Relief Services funding comes directly from US taxpayers.  One could imagine that, if freed of the Johnson Amendment the bishops would be placed in a very difficult position, not wanting to anger either party by openly opposing some or many (or all) of their candidates.  Such politicking could place their precious, precious billions at risk.  Can’t have that.

In addition, one can easily forecast how divided and lukewarm the bishops would be in determining which candidates to endorse or oppose.

Think how many very difficult, uncomfortable stands out milquetoast bishops would have to take should the Johnson Amendment be repealed.  The house divided they worry about is their own conference’s alienation from faithful souls.  Either way they went, they’d be angering a large proportion of their sharply divided flock, but in most of these cases, there is a clear, Catholic moral imperative to support one candidate and oppose another. Right now, they have the perfect excuse not to speak out much more forcefully against pro-abort, pro-contraception, pro-perversion, etc., candidates.  They simply can’t speak out for fear of losing that “holy” tax exempt status.  It’s great cover.

But it’s also a huge shirking of duty and conduct unworthy of a shepherd of souls.  In fact, much of the division among those in this country who apply the name Catholic to themselves stems precisely from the bishop’s unwillingness to take clear stands on moral issues, and, more importantly, impose ecclesiastical penalties against politicians and others of notoriety who advocate for positions contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith.  How many pro-abort politicians have been denied Communion, for instance?  How many have been condemned by name?  How many morally worthless, mealy-mouthed “voting guides” have been trotted out over the years, always containing just enough  morally ambiguous language to give a shade of cover for those who want to vote for politicians who advance morally reprehensible positions?

Overall, this commentary reveals the moral corruption at the heart of the USCCB and most national episcopal conferences.  Not only do they try to enforce a rigid conformity, blocking individual ordinary’s ability to speak out by imposing penalties against those who do, they also reveal a bureaucratic contractor more concerned with getting paid than saving souls.  Repealing the Johnson Amendment would allow the Church and the protestant sects and others to have a stronger impact on the electoral landscape than they’ve had in decades, and thus materially improve the moral condition of this nation.  In point of fact, one can trace the steady decline in morals in this country almost in a direct line back to 1954 – that is to say, the silencing of the churches played a significant role in the subsequent moral collapse of this nation.

But perhaps many of our shepherds today consider that much more of a feature, than a bug.  Whatever keeps  the gravy train rolling……is that their primary concern?  And how many of them favor the Church to be a mute, subservient, loyal and dutiful NGO-type contractor to the government, rather than the radically countercultural Body of Christ and vehicle of salvation she is intended by our Lord to be?

Advertisements

Comments

1. Tim - March 7, 2017

They don’t want to give up one of their smokescreens that they use to justify their desire to be worldly and not teach the TRUTH.

Baseballmomof8 - March 8, 2017

Took the post right off my keyboard…. they LOVE the excuse the JA gives them.

2. Camper - March 8, 2017

Wow. What a pack of lowlifes. Anything to keep from preaching dogma and enforcing canon law.

3. Margaret Costello - March 8, 2017

Yup, I thought the same thing: money and showing the schism within the Church. Can’t mess with their gravy train i.e. the government. And can’t take the cover off the facade that “all is well” when that would show each Church, each diocese etc. is saying conflicting things i.e. promoting different candidates. Archbishop Lori is a modernist and pro-sodomy cleric. Check out Louie Verrechio’s blog about him. God bless~

4. The Lord's Blog - March 8, 2017

Reblogged this on Jean'sBistro2010's Blog.

5. virtuouscitizenship - March 8, 2017

Give me a break! These wolves have for decades preached the Democrat dogmas from the pulpit – and of course were never indicted for it. They do not want any priest ever saying anything contra-democrat religion from the pulpit. Guy Mcclung, San Antonio, Texas

JTLiuzza - March 8, 2017

Exactly right. Just last week San Diego bishop McElroy brazenly encouraged everyone to “disrupt” the administration. These leftist parasites are already free from the Johnson Amendment. As long as they toe the marxist leftist progressivist line, they will not be touched. But if they dare get political in ways that are not “correct,” watch the outrage and the leftist toadies screaming to revoke tax exempt status, bludgeoning anyone they disagree with into silence.

The Johnson Amendment supposedly applies to ALL 501(c)(3)’s, not just churches. That includes universities, the ACLU, the NAACP, the Southern “Poverty” Law Center, and on and on. Any political activity or political speech coming out of those outfits? That’s all they exist for, especially universities.

The Johnson Amendment is a one way street. A bludgeon selectively used to silence only those not on the vile left.

Repealing it is an absolute no brainer and is simply leveling the playing field. That in the horrendous state of the modern church we have sorry excuses for bishops like Lori that don’t have the stomach to state the obvious and, instead, mumble and equivocate, is not a surprise. Worse yet and more probable is that he sees the Johnson Amendment quite clearly for what it is and is fine and dandy with it. Hirelings all.

6. Joseph D'Hippolito - March 8, 2017

“US Bishops Oppose Appeal of Johnson Amendment – Why?”

Simple. The bishops — not just in this country but around the world, especially in the developed world — have sold out to the Satanic world system that seeks to oppose Christ. They’re not the only ones within Christianity, either.

7. bluebird4458 - March 8, 2017

These prelates have the spines of jellyfish. Deplorable 😭

8. skeinster - March 8, 2017

What was that our Lord said about serving two masters?
“Hate one, love the other?”
Too bad the government won out.

Altough, I do think back in the very early days, the lure of more money for charity was probably hard to resist. The Catholic agencies just didn’t count the cost…

9. Molly Alley - March 8, 2017

When priests teaching on political issues is considered dissension, only dissenting priests will teach on political issues.

Camper - March 8, 2017

Nice.

Tim - March 8, 2017

I don’t know if that is necessarily true, please elaborate on this position. Thank you.

10. Lori - March 8, 2017

NOthing seems to stop the liberal priests like Pfleger in Chicago.

JTLiuzza - March 8, 2017

Curios, that. Spot on Lori.

11. Canon212 Update: Benedict Stepped Down Under Pressure. Will Anyone Care? – The Stumbling Block - March 8, 2017

[…] AS EXPECTED, U.S. BISHOPS REALLY DON’T WANT TRUMP TO REPEAL THE JOHNSON AMENDMENT.  THEY’D HAVE TO ACT CATHOLIC. […]

12. tg - March 8, 2017

The bishops want to have an excuse for not preaching against sodomy.

13. dthy - March 8, 2017

The statement, “I think it would have a tendency to unnecessarily divide our congregations” is really ironic. We’re already divided. We have in this diocese now, in addition to the Mass in English, Spanish Mass, Polish Mass, Kenyan Mass, etc. There are many things that divide us, but it was nice when, at least at the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we were all one family.

Tantumblogo - March 8, 2017

Yes. I could almost accept the archbishop’s justification, but what he is talking about is not an actual increase in division, but only its becoming more public, more open. At present I doubt 5% of those who claim the name Catholic accept all the Doctrine of the Faith. 2/3 of self-described Catholics think the Eucharist only a symbol. Even among the most “devout,” weekly Mass-goers or even daily Mass attendees, I know from personal experience that error and the deliberate holding of opinions contrary to the Doctrine of the Faith – such as acceptance of fornication and contraception – is rife. Maybe 20-25% of frequent regular Mass attendees accept all the Doctrine of the Faith as they know it on MAJOR issues, let alone relatively minor points of theology that have been forgotten or ignored in the post-conciliar period, and weekly Mass goers are about 10-15% of the overall population. That right there points to maybe 2-3% actually living in accord with the Faith.

14. Richard Malcolm - March 9, 2017

I’m all for confessional states as the ideal of political arrangements, but I really do think that one of the best things that could happen to the Church in America would be a total cutoff of all federal and state funding for all its activities. I think I’d include vouchers, too (I far prefer tuition tax credits – the money really does become that of the parents). Ween them off state largesse. Some offices would need to close, but honestly, they need to close.

15. FRLBJ - March 10, 2017

Incredible! These bishops exhibit no leadership. Follow the world is what they do!
My Dad talked to a fellow who was paid by someone in the Johnson campaign
to take some ballot boxes into Mexico and party it up there for a couple of days in the 1948 US Senate election.

16. Ellis County - March 11, 2017

1954 — A Marian Year. I know that because the cornerstone of our previous church – now called our chapel – in Waxahachie says 1954 Marian Year on it.

https://forums.catholic.com/showthread.php?t=540977

“PRAYER OF POPE PIUS XII This prayer, dedicated to Mary Immaculate, was composed by the Pope for the Marian Year (December 8, 1953-December 8, 1954), which was proclaimed to mark the centenary of the definition of the dogma of the Immaculate Conception.”

The Immaculate Conception is the patron saint of the U.S. of course.

Ellis County - March 11, 2017

P.S. They never did take the Communion Rail out at St. Joseph’s although the “gateway” in the middle of the Rail was removed.


Sorry comments are closed for this entry

%d bloggers like this: