So, if you criticize the CCHD, you are in ecclesiastically authoritative company. It is the CCHD that disavows the bishops, so any criticisms directed their way cannot possibly attach to an ecclesiastic Church authority.

The Church is infallible, not the lay folk.

Though I think I really ought to heed Mary’s advise (“move along folks”), something needs to be pointed out: The USCCB is emphatically not the bishops. It is not a meeting of bishops, nor a synod, or a group that speaks on behalf of the bishops. It is, rather, a result of the merger of the National Conference of Catholic Bishops and the National Catholic Conference some years back. Now, the National Conference of Catholic Bishops was far closer to being “the bishops” than is the USCCB, but it also was not a forum for an ongoing synod of sorts. The National Catholic Conference was a mostly lay organization.

The merger of the two means that the USCCB is a mostly lay organization that happens to have the words “bishops” and “conference” in its name. The group is usually pretty good and offers abundant faithful resources. However, it does not speak for the bishops nor is its primary function the exercise of the authority of the Catholic hierarchy.

Indeed, individual bishops themselves have criticized the USCCB: “Vatican Archbishop Raymond Burke says that the USCCB’s ‘Forming Consciences for aithful Citizenship’ is partly to blame for the election of the ‘most pro-abortion president’ in US history” (http://www.cathnewsusa.com/article.aspx?aeid=11449). Archbishop Burke (then of St. Louis) and Archbishop Chaput (still of Denver) were among several who criticized the USCCB for its publication of a positive review of the anti-Catholic film, The Golden Compass (http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/dec/07121405.html).

All this means that criticizing the decisions of the USCCB is identical to criticizing the decisions of any other Catholic lay organization: the criticisms must be judged based solely on their content.

To equate the USCCB with the American bishops — much less to a formal synod, or even a meeting, of the American bishops — is simply wrong.

Again, this does not mean that the USCCB is completely wrong about everything. Like most Catholic groups, it does a lot of good. But also like most Catholic groups, it promulgates a lot of error. The good ought to be recognized; the errors need to be pointed out as well.

In the strictest sense, moreover, it is worth pointing out that even a synod of the American bishops alone is not infallible — though it probably ought to be treated as if it were until better information comes along. An individual bishop speaking within his own diocese, however, is completely authoritative. His commands on faith an morals ought to be obeyed without any ado.

But the USCCB is neither of these things.

At least now you know what article to write if you want to get three pages of posts. I wonder if you would be as lax on bishop-bashing as you are thread-jacking.

CE posters are obviously more interested in the turkey thawing than the ice caps melting or Krakatau blowing for that matter.

I’m sorry my analogy of the faithful tossing bishops that depart in their teaching of the faith was not clear. It was meant to illustrate that the truth of the faith can be discerned by the body of Christ and that even laity can recognize a wolf in pastor’s clothing without advanced theological study. Neither bishops nor lay entities are authonomous. The bishop is only effective in his teaching, sanctification, and governance to the extent of his union with the Pope and his brother bishops in union with the Pope. The local laity has a role in there in recognition of that union and can recognize when deviation from that is occurring.

Sorry – I threadjacked this..Del

Indeed, it is the Church which is infallible, not the lay folk, and not any particular bishop or even any group of bishops. Del Elkinton applauded those laypeople because they tossed out a false teacher, one who taught contrary to what the Church teaches. Heterodoxy and heresy have been spoken by the laity, the consecrated religious, and those in holy orders, even Popes. In each and every case, it is the duty of good Christians, no matter their position in the Church, to call false teachings and false teachers false.

Take Bishop Thomas Gumbleton, for example. He promotes the ordination of women, something the Church cannot do, and has no authority to do. Shall we listen to him regarding this issue, because he is a bishop and we are not? Or should we point out that he is wrong on this issue, and should not be obeyed?

I read:

“Professor Phil Jones Director of the Climatic Research Unit (CRU) at the University of East Anglia in Norwich says charges of conspiracy over climate change are ‘rubbish’. ”

Please read the details in http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/nov/24/climate-professor-leaked-emails-uea.

There is a need for further clarification here.

Here in CE I have heard bishops (USCCB) being condemned for supporting a pro-abortion group (CCHD). A priest friend of mine is very anti-Catholic, but he pretends to appy his criticism to the Vatican. One cannot separate the institution from its members.

The whole point of Jesus’ teaching was not the first amendment of the US constitution and related topics. [..we have freedom of speech and freedom of assembly, on top of freedom of religion. Obedience comes in the from areas such as paying taxes and following the laws — not in rote agreement of her leaders. that was Jesus whole point.]

I also read “I applaud the 4th Century parish folk who would bodily toss out bishops who would propose that the Son was not consubstantial with the Father. No advanced learning was needed there, just recognizing the truth through the help of the Holy Spirit.”

This implies lay folk should decide theological issues. It seems to deny that the Holy Spirit was with Athanasius in the Arian Crisis and in the Council of Nicea in 325. The Church is infallible, not the lay folk.

Have Cardinals George and Mahony strayed?

I read recently:

“Cardinal Francis E. George of Chicago, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops, said Nov. 16 that Catholic publications, universities or other organizations that insist on complete independence from their bishops are “sectarian, less than fully Catholic.”

In his presidential address at the opening session of the fall USCCB general assembly in Baltimore, George announced that the bishops “have recently begun discussions on how we might strengthen our relationship to Catholic universities, to media claiming to be a voice in the church, and to organizations that direct various works under Catholic auspices.””

Have the bishops been in contact with CE recently?

I have criticism of Mary’s science which I will answer in another post.

God bless,

NoelFitz.