Bp. DiMarzio: Obama proposes what is “shameful and criminal in the eyes of Almighty God”

Fr. Z kudos to Brooklyn’s bishop Most Rev. Nicholas DiMarzio.  It is dated, but it is good, and still relevant.

With a biretta tip Pewsitter and to Veneremur Cernui I saw this at CNSNews:

Catholic Bishop: Obama Is ‘Proponent’ of What is ‘Shameful and Criminal in the Eyes of Almighty God’

(CNSNews.com) – Nicholas DiMarzio, the Catholic bishop of the diocese of Brooklyn, N.Y., says that in his zealous support for abortion, President Barack Obama has used his position not to help mothers and children in difficult circumstances but instead has been an advocate for that which “is shameful and criminal in the eyes of Almighty God.”

In his column for the diocesan newspaper The Tablet, [Jan 2013 – not to be confused with the dreadful homonymous weekly in England] entitled “Deeper Into the Culture of Death,” Bishop DiMarzio praises Abraham Lincoln, the abolition of slavery, and notes how far the nation has come in electing Obama as president. DiMarzio also notes the 40th anniversary of the Supreme Court’s Roe v. Wade decision, which legalized abortion through all nine months of pregnancy and how Obama has promoted that decision.

“The so-called ‘pro-choice’ movement has its roots in the ideology of Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, who understood her call to be one who would ‘assist the race toward the elimination of the unfit,’” [eugenics] states Bishop DiMarzio. “Of course, a young Barack Obama was precisely the sort of unfit child that Sanger and her allies would want to eliminate.” [exactly]

“Tragically, the President has not been an advocate for those young children faced with similarly difficult circumstances,” says Bp. DiMarzio. “He has chosen to use the bully pulpit not to call upon us all to be nobler and to embrace each child, regardless of origins and circumstances; rather, he has been a proponent of an expediency that is shameful and criminal in the eyes of Almighty God.” [OORAH!]

The bishop also discusses the Obamacare mandate that requires nearly all health care plans to offer contraceptives, sterilization, and abortion-inducing drugs without co-pays, arguing that these rules “imposed on our Nation” would force “Catholic institutions to provide employees with medical procedures and services we believe to be in defiance of the will of God.” [But not in defiance of Obama’s will.]

“We know that, today, an administration that is hostile requires contraception and sterilization,” states the bishop. “However, as government involves itself in our internal affairs, there is little doubt in anyone’s mind that the government would seek to compel religious institutions to provide abortion services in the future.” [I don’t doubt it.  As a matter of fact, if we give them more inches than we already have, the open persecution, which is inevitable, will begin that much more quickly.]

He continues, “In my view, those who voted for President Obama bear the responsibility for a step deeper in the culture of death. Under the cover of women’s issues, we now see an assault on religious freedom and personal conscience.”

[…]

Read the rest there.

Again, thanks, Your Excellency, for clear talk instead of fluffy unicorns and happy gas. Refreshing.

I would add that people who stayed home and refused to vote against Obama also share in some of the responsibility.

FacebookEmailPinterestGoogle GmailShare/Bookmark

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Brick by Brick, Emanations from Penumbras, Fr. Z KUDOS, Our Catholic Identity, Religious Liberty, The Coming Storm, The Drill, The future and our choices and tagged , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

42 Responses to Bp. DiMarzio: Obama proposes what is “shameful and criminal in the eyes of Almighty God”

  1. DisturbedMary says:

    DiMarzio has also been a steadfast visible pray-er outside of abortion mills in Brooklyn. That says a lot for the bishop. Very old-fashioned priest and I mean that as a compliment. He puts his sheep first not the media or the politicians. A real man of the people.

  2. Legisperitus says:

    Someone should inform the POTUS that “bully pulpit” does not mean “pulpit for a bully.”

  3. Vincent. says:

    This morning it was announced that our new Bishop of Albany is from Bishop DiMarzio’s diocese. I think this is a good sign for the Church of Albany.

    http://dioceseofbrooklyn.org/brooklyn-priest-appointed-bishop-of-albany/

  4. thickmick says:

    He attended TLM at Our Lady Of Peace in Brooklyn, and issued wonderful words of support for our community here. Thanks, Your Excellency for all the support. We love and pray for you!

  5. MarkJ says:

    Definitions of the Latin word POTUS:
    1.(action of) drinking (intoxicating drink); 2.drink/draught; 3.something to drink

    Jeremiah 25:15: “This is what the Lord, the God of Israel, said to me: “Take from my hand this cup filled with the wine of my wrath and make all the nations to whom I send you drink it.”

    Revelation 14:10 : “they, too, will drink the wine of God’s fury, which has been poured full strength into the cup of his wrath. They will be tormented with burning sulfur in the presence of the holy angels and of the Lamb.”

  6. Darren says:

    Kudos to Bishop DiMarzio… who started his priestly ministry as a priest of the parish in Jersey City, NJ where I was baptized, confirmed, etc… and while Bishop of Camden, NJ he established Mater Ecclesiae where Fr. Pasley has been celebrating the Traditional Latin Mass exclusively since 2000 – the first Diocesan TLM-only Parish in the country.

  7. Mike Morrow says:

    What a magnificent exercise of episcopal responsibility by Bishop DiMarzio!

    But doubtless many of his auxiliary bishops, priests, and lay members in his diocese will be dismayed at harsh words for their candidate to transform Trinity into Quadrinity. For Fr. Z writes: “I would add that people who stayed home and refused to vote against Obama also share in some of the responsibility.” It is much worse than that!

    The majority of voting US “catholics” actively support the beast. This includes many US bishops and priests who forfeited all honor and integrity, prostituting themselves for earthly rewards from this earthly god they love so well.

  8. robtbrown says:

    Vincent. says:
    This morning it was announced that our new Bishop of Albany is from Bishop DiMarzio’s diocese. I think this is a good sign for the Church of Albany.

    That both Bps Clark and Hubbard are now retired (and before them, Trautman and Mahoney) makes it appropriate to sing the Nunc Dimittis.

  9. MarkJ says:

    Those who voted for this POTUS have asked to drink of this cup… let us pray that in the next election all of our bishops will speak out courageously for the sake of our country and our souls. We must make the Church’s voice heard in the next election. And pray for a candidate who will support the culture of life.

  10. MarkJ says:

    All of us have an obligation as well to pray for the President’s conversion…

  11. JKnott says:

    I agree with MarkJ: “All of us have an obligation as well to pray for the President’s conversion…”
    Not only his but for all who voted for him.
    There is an old documentary of the Americans going into find the results of the concentration camps after WWII. Horrible to watch but done for proof and history.
    One of the things that struck me about it is how the American generals brought in the local people who lived around the camps and made them each go into the gas chambers, and view many of the other horrors. They went meekly. The looked at it. There were no lawsuits and cries of being offended to the point of having their lives ruined. They went. They observed. That was when there was something noble about our country.
    Today it is against the law to show pictures of aborted babies and mainstream media hides the consequences of the Obama administration’s destruction of morals and freedom in America.
    Those people who voted for Obama, priests and lay alike, ignorant or otherwise, I pray will walk through the rubble of death and destruction that this first homosexual president and baby killer and all his lackeys have perpetrated on humanity in our country and now abroad with its promotion of abortion and homosexual sin in foreign lands. From nobility to a president and his wife and media raving about a football player who “comes out” publicly about living a sinful life. Big news.
    Weep, voters of Obama. Weep religious and lay who still love this monster of a president. Some of us are praying for you.

  12. Ganganelli says:

    Wow that article is from January of 2013 at the President’s inauguration. Did anyone read the subsequent articles from the bishop? The focus seems to be on all the liberal issues like immigration, gun control, income inequality, etc. He even congratulated Bill DeBlasio on winning the mayoral election in New York. Is this the Francis effect at work?

  13. wanda says:

    Thank you, thank you, Bishop DiMarzio. God bless you.

  14. Dimitri_Cavalli says:

    We’ll see how Gov. Cuomo and Mayor DeBlasio (who once supported and raised money for the Nicaraguan Sandinistas even AFTER the well-publicized persecution and murder of the indigenous Miskito Indian population) respond after the latter agreed with the former that “extreme” conservatives, including pro-lifers, have no place in New York.

  15. Venerator Sti Lot says:

    Fr. Z employs the phrase “refused to vote against” – ah, were such a thing possible, in all sorts of elections! Unfortunately, in most elections to public office in the United States, as far as I know, it is only possible to vote for one from among the candidates, or refrain from voting for any candidate.

    If the Russo-German Treaty of Non-Agression had had a longer success, and eventually elections had been held in which people could choose between Hitler and Stalin, one would not have done well to choose either. If American elections tend not to be quite as extreme as that, there can be weighty enough analogies. (The good folks of MassResistance are worth consulting on that, to take one example.)

  16. Cordelio says:

    Dear Father Z,

    While I would strongly support an amendment to our election laws that let you vote directly against one or more candidates without voting for another candidate (in fact, that would be awesome), I’m pretty sure that isn’t the case now. Hence nobody who stayed home actually refused to vote against Obama – they were never given that choice. Instead, they refused to vote for any of the other objectively bad, albeit some subjectively better than others, candidates.

    The people who voted for those other bad candidates (e.g., Romney – who supports abortion in cases of rape and incest) might be excused from sin by double effect, depending on their intentions – but I’m pretty sure that one is never morally obliged to make such a choice.

    Perhaps I don’t understand what you’re suggesting by saying that some share in the responsibility – or there was some authentically Catholic candidate I overlooked? Incidentally, I did vote for a candidate other than Obama – so I am not trying to excuse my own behavior – just insisting on proper principles.

  17. LarryW2LJ says:

    Good to see that we’ll have at least one strong Bishop to stand up to Mr. DeBlasio, as well.

  18. tonyfernandez says:

    I resent the idea that because I didn’t vote, that somehow I contributed to Obama’s election and what he’s doing. I didn’t vote because I never like any of the other options and because I don’t feel that any man should have as much power as a president has. So please, go ahead and blame those who voted for Obama, but don’t try to pin blame on those who abstained from the sordid political process.

  19. Pingback: Bishop DiMarzio Slams Obama - BigPulpit.com

  20. midwestmom says:

    Eugenics? I had a priest tell me that subject is “propaganda.” And then hint that perhsps the real reason I didn’t vote for Obama was my racism.

  21. Andrew says:

    tonyfernandez:
    “I resent the idea that because I didn’t vote, that somehow I contributed to Obama’s election …”
    The number of votes received by each candidate is directly proportionate to the number of votes cast by the voters. It is a question of simple arithmetic. How we feel about it has nothing to do with the final result. And Obama made no secret of where he stood on these issues before the election.

  22. Supertradmum says:

    My son and I did absentee ballots against this man but we never knew if they were counted. Many overseas military votes “went missing”. I am still grieving over the fact that my entire family bar me, that is my brothers and parents voted for him. I tried so hard. I hope and pray their eyes are opened to the great evil he has wrought.

    No, there is no going back in America. We are headed for God’s punishment.

  23. tonyfernandez says:

    Andrew,

    The arithmetic is simple. I didn’t vote for Obama, so I did not contribute to his election. Blame those who voted for him, not those who had issues with all of the candidates.

  24. benedetta says:

    There’s never going to be a perfect candidate who presents no issues for most of us. As to an act of omission that could have prevented this man’s election and his consequent actions, I suppose it is something to ponder. Even when all the candidates stink, as Catholics, when what is at stake is someone who wishes to increase abortions as compared to others who at least seem willing to listen to prolife and learn from it, our responsibility is to support prolife. I will say the nuns on the bus and the Cath Dem position that Obama helping the poor would decrease abortions overall therefore constituted a more prolife position lacked credibility and rang hollow to me and many others. After all, if Obama is ashamed to openly listen to prolife (ashamed of Christ?) then whatever his approach toward the poor, talking out of the other side of this mouth at the same time is the proposal to just kill the poor. That’s what it is. Unless he as a leader, statesman of the type he seems to aim to be in history, can step up and say that the poor children in our country are worth saving, that these children do in fact matter, and to stop the genocide in NYC of roughly half of NYer babies slaughtered, then, all he accomplishes is essentially bribing a certain small percentage to, be more careful about birth control. Not something to write in the history books about. Kudos to Bishop DiMarzio. If it is a safety net, in this country, how acceptable is it to say, just some, may have this life, and live it, but a good percentage, may not, and that is fine with our leader. Lincoln he is not. Compassion, he lacks.

  25. benedetta says:

    Typo: Unless he as a leader…can NOT step up and say…

  26. GypsyMom says:

    Although a great number of “Catholics” voted for this evil tyrant, there was so much voter fraud out there that we won’t know until the General Judgement if he was actually elected by the American people. If he was fraudulently elected, a very real possibility with electronic voting and the existence of Democrats, that fact could end up being a mitigating factor in the upcoming punishment God will soon send. But it sure as shootin’ won’t help out those traitor “Catholics” any!

  27. AvantiBev says:

    Obama didn’t emerge out of the ozone. Catholics for at least 2 to 3 generations voted for more and more Nanny State programs under the guise of being charitable. Wielding the force of the IRS to root around in another’s paycheck and assets so that you can feel morally superior is neither “Christian charity” nor Constitutional action.
    Children today face either abortion or, if lucky enough to be born, are born into indentured servitude because the cry of the so-called charitable for 70 years has been “The government should do something about….(insert the name of your favorite boondoggle here).”

  28. Jamey Brown says:

    Thank you, Father Z, for another valuable and inspiring post. And to Bishop DiMarzio: Thank you for your bold and noble statements. I am so proud of what you did. I have been a member of your Diocese since my conversion in 2007 and this is truly our finest hour. I have deeply admired your steadfast processions and prayers at abortion clinics, and I am sure you are aware of the firestorm these statements will ignite. I pray that our good Lord will give you, and all of us who stand for life, courage in our battle against all that “the gates of hell” will throw against us. I hope that others will follow your bold stand. Thanks be to God.

  29. CharlesG says:

    Sti Venerator: To imply that voting for Romney is akin to voting for Stalin or Hitler is ridiculous. He may not have been the perfect candidate, but he was miles better than the absolute evil of Obama, which I think a lot of the people who could not sully themselves to vote for Romney tend to downplay. I’m with Fr. Z on this one.

  30. bookworm says:

    The argument that not voting for Romney = voting for Obama would have more validity if presidents were elected by direct popular vote. However, the ONLY votes that really count in a presidential election are the state-by-state electoral votes. If you live in a “blue” state whose electoral votes were in the bag for Obama all along, then your individual vote for anyone other than Obama, or for no candidate, probably did not influence the electoral outcome in your state — which is the only place your vote CAN influence the outcome. The same is true if you live in a “red” state whose electoral vote was in the bag for Romney — your abstention didn’t deprive him of a single electoral vote from your state. Only if you lived in a critical swing state whose electoral vote was decided by a close margin does this argument hold water.

  31. Ben Kenobi says:

    “I would add that people who stayed home and refused to vote against Obama also share in some of the responsibility.”

    Father Z:

    I must respectfully disagree. Men and women are only responsible for their own vote and the actions over which they themselves have control. I have no responsibility for what others choose. My sole and solemn duty is to vote for the man whom I believe most represents me. It is not my responsibility that others choose to vote for Obama.

    Romney himself promoted his version of Romneycare in Massachusetts. He has supported abortion rights, and gay marriage when he was in Massachusetts. I did not trust the man then, and I do not trust him now. Ergo, I would not have cast a ballot for him.

    It was not Obama who passed Obamacare – it was passed with the assistance of the Democrats elected to Congress. How many Catholics voted for people like Nancy Pelosi, for years and years? Obama is a figurehead of a much broader and much more pernicious problem – secular marxism which has afflicted the Republican party too. It does us no good to vote in Republicans who simply seek the same ends at a slower pace.

  32. guans says:

    It’s not just eugenics. The elites believe there are too many humans destroying the earth, hence the DEMAND for population control, contraceptives, abortion and of course, same-sex marriage
    and euthanasia.

  33. SKAY says:

    bookworm:
    “However, the ONLY votes that really count in a presidential election are the state-by-state electoral votes.”
    Very good point. Of course the reason we have the Electoral College is to make sure that every state has an equal voice no matter it’s size or population. Same idea for the Senate-two for each.
    That still makes your vote important.
    Even if you are a red state – and mine is at this point–there is never any guarantee. We have a large city that is totally Democrat and unfortunately we have one Democrat Senator. After she voted for Obamacare, suddenly it became possible for her brother to become Mayor of this large city. All other serious competition(all Democrats) suddenly vanished. Who knows how many votes will suddenly appear for her in that city if she needs them in the upcoming election. We all laugh at the ability of al lot of dead Democrats to come back and vote in that area –but of course it really is not funny because there has always been some serious election “irregularities” in that area favoring the Dems. It has made a difference in close elections.
    We have seen people in other states bragging about voting 5 or six times for Obama–and one worked at the polls. If you think this happened only in one instance in one state you are living in a dream world.
    Votes do matter.

    “President Obama “quipped” today during a visit to Monticello with the French president, “That’s the good thing about being president, I can do whatever I want.”

  34. Unwilling says:

    re cartoon
    By writing CATHOLICS in block, you can’t guess whether they are Catholics or catholics. But, anyway, I can’t get their surprise. If C, it’s long been seen coming. If c, it’s what they want.

  35. CrimsonCatholic says:

    For all those who voted for someone else, who was this candidate that was better than Romney? Only 4 political parties had enough ballot access to win the presidential election. Those four were Libertarian, Green, Democratic, and Republican. A vote for anyone else is a wasted vote, or the same as not voting.

  36. Ganganelli says:

    Don’t forget about us old time Democrats that are disgusted at the depraved state of our party on cultural issues but could never vote for someone like Mitt Romney(or any of the Republican candidates for that matter). It is precisely in the Church’s social doctrine, where Pope Francis is most traditional. Evangelii Gaudium is teaching the same thing that Leo XIII taught in Rerum Novarum well over 100 years ago.

    People like to make fun of “Bing Crosby” Catholicism but it really was a better time in both society and the Church. The top tax rate on the very rich was high, unions and regulations were strong, and a man could support his wife and as many kids as God blessed him on ONE income. They truly were “Happy Days” as the old TV show portrayed.

  37. tonyfernandez says:

    Ganganelli doesn’t realize that the effective tax rate in this country hasn’t changed much in the past 60 years. What has changed is that we have far more social spending than we’ve ever had, and it’s destroying this country’s productivity.

  38. capchoirgirl says:

    Ganganelli, you can support a family on one income. My dad has done it for 35 years….

  39. chcrix says:

    I’ll chime in supporting Ben Kenobi here.
    I don’t regret for a second not voting for either Willard or Mad Dog (never saw a war he didn’t support) McCain.
    His excellency needs to brush up on American History though…
    Abraham Lincoln didn’t give the proverbial nezumi’s hind parts about slavery. Converting Abe into an abolitionist was the first great propaganda coup of the modern American state.
    “Put not your trust in princes” is and remains a great idea – though I’d sooner trust Blessed Charles of Austria than an Illinois pol.
    (If you want to know the score check the following post by Tom DiLorenzo:
    http://www.lewrockwell.com/2014/02/thomas-dilorenzo/the-regime-celebrates-its-birthday/ )

  40. OrthodoxChick says:

    Ganganelli,

    Perhaps part of the reason why a father could support his family on one income is because families back in the good ‘ol days tended to have one car per family (vs. 2-4 cars today), one t.v. per family (and no cable/dish bill in order to receive programs on it), one phone per household (without the addition of 3+ cell phones per family), no computers (nor internet service for it) to add to the monthly bills, and often, families could save a little on the food bill by supplementing their own garden-grown produce or being given some by generous friends and neighbors who had gardens. In the Bing Crosby Catholic days, young ladies were taught by their mothers how to become frugal housewives who could stretch the dollar that their husband brought home. In general, families made due with less. I wouldn’t give any political party credit for the practicality of the times.

  41. Absit invidia says:

    The bishops have taken the position on the HHS mandate citing the constitutionality of the law as if they are a political party. The Obama regime will never listen to this, they won’t listen to anything, even the Constitution. The best the bishops can do now is to speak the Gospel while the attention is on the HHS mandate and spread that message. The Obama regime is going to continue digging in their heels and we need to take countermeasures.

  42. Scott W. says:

    The argument that not voting for Romney = voting for Obama would have more validity if presidents were elected by direct popular vote. However, the ONLY votes that really count in a presidential election are the state-by-state electoral votes. If you live in a “blue” state whose electoral votes were in the bag for Obama all along, then your individual vote for anyone other than Obama, or for no candidate, probably did not influence the electoral outcome in your state — which is the only place your vote CAN influence the outcome. The same is true if you live in a “red” state whose electoral vote was in the bag for Romney — your abstention didn’t deprive him of a single electoral vote from your state. Only if you lived in a critical swing state whose electoral vote was decided by a close margin does this argument hold water.

    Correct. It would hold more water, but not much, considering no amount of brow-beating Catholics would have made up the millions of votes shortfall that the Rombot got.

    Voting is the lex orandi to progressivism’s lex credendi.