From “The Private Diary of Bishop F. Atticus McButterpants” – 23-05-12 – Bishops Statement on Immigration

EDITOR: Still catching up with diary pages from the “mole”. Sometimes the transcription takes a while, too.  Some of you might not know all the bishops of the region that includes the Diocese of Libville.

Archbishop of Red Bird: John “Jack” Daniels (Auxiliary Terence Broadhurst)
Diocese of Black Duck: Jude Noble
Diocese of Recker: Mateo Cienfuegos
Diocese of St. Christopher: Andrew Esposito
Diocese of Pie Town: Antuninu “Dozer” Ruspa


May 12th, 2023

Dear Diary,

Another meeting of the region bishops.  This one wasn’t fun at all.  The Arch, Jack, wants us area bishops to make a statement about illegal immigration.  We aren’t supposed to call it that, but that’s what it is, right?  Anyway, took all the joy out of lunch at Charlies after even though the steaks were really good.

I’ll admit PRIVATEY that some issues are just too complex for me.  I got okay grades in school, so I’ve got the chops, but sometimes heavy things are best left to smarter guys. I’m able to get some really smart guys around me, like Fr. Tommy.  I’m starting to regret his absence because of that ankle thing with Chester.   Darn.  And something about Fr. Gilbert … too cheerful all the time.  I like when everyone’s happy, but sheesh.  When I run something by him he just grins with those irritating dimples and talks baby talk to Chester who laps it up, traitor.

This whole border issue and all the illegal immigrants coming across. What the heck are we supposed to say?   One of Jack’s auxiliaries – Terry? Larry? – can never remember his name – sent around a statement, quoting all sorts of other statements about how we have to welcome the stranger and so on. Hard to disagree. I mean, Jesus was an illegal immigrant, wasn’t he? I don’t know.  Terry Larry showed pictures of poor people with their arms outstretched through these walls, trying to get in, and it made me sad. But Bp Mateo from Recker also showed pictures of people with farms near the border. Been in their families for generations. Huge damage done to their crops by people traipsing through. That makes me sad, too.  Dozer said that some of these people are not nice at all! They’re gang members. Worse.

Why can’t we fix the problems in the countries that these people are leaving so they don’t come here? I asked that in the meeting but Jack said “We can’t ask that question.”  Afterwards, Andy pulled me aside and said it’s racist to criticize those countries. That doesn’t make sense to me.

Both the VG and Fr. Tommy always say I should think carefully before saying anything or signing anything. This  is one of those things that, whatever I do or say, some people will be ticked off. I don’t like that. It shouldn’t be hard. We should all just get along.   Too much to ask?

I just wish I understood things better.

I’ll probably sign the statement. After all, I don’t want to be the odd man out.

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Diary of Bp. McButterpants, SESSIUNCULA and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.


  1. Gregg the Obscure says:

    oh no. i have something in common with Fatty – well something besides my own fatness that is. one of my usual prayer intentions: “for immigrants and migrants, that they be treated in accord with their human dignity and that those who have it within their influence to do so address the forces that have shattered families and communities so that the peoples of the developing world may flourish in peace in their own homelands”.

  2. Greg Hlatky says:

    The Duke of Norfolk: Oh confound all this. I’m not a scholar, I don’t know whether the marriage was lawful or not but – dammit, Thomas, look at these names! Why can’t you do as I did and come with us, for fellowship!

    More: And when we die, and you are sent to heaven for doing your conscience, and I am sent to hell for not doing mine, will you come with me, for fellowship?

  3. Not says:

    Just this year USCCB recieved 26 Million to “take care of” illegals.
    I wonder where the money for the steak dinner came from?

  4. PostCatholic says:

    The current border issue is about end of Title 42 and people seeking permit to enter as asylum seekers, thus legal immigration.

  5. palestrinadei says:

    It seems +Atticus, like many Boomers one might find in Libville, could be starting to recognize that his long held opinions, once on what seemed to be the progressive cutting edge, became politically incorrect under his nose. Also, speaking of “odd man out”, where is +Jude in all this? Silent, absent (maybe leading the Ignatian Exercises), or simply unnoticed by our portly protagonist? I could not imagine someone like him signing the kind of statement the Archbishop and his auxiliary appear to be soliciting. In which direction would an abstention or dissent from Black Duck sway our “hero”? The plot thickens…

  6. jaykay says:

    I can just see +Emeritus Atticus, in… ummm… 10 years’ time (?) during the pontificate of Papa Sarah, H.E. Cardinal Schneider being prefect of the Holy Office (the Great Tribulation™, the Three Days of Darkness© etc. etc. being come and gone) happily, if somewhat snoozefully, presiding over a Pontifical High Mass and musing on how “we all did that goofy stuff that was the thing back then. But, hey, just gotta change and Latin ain’t that haaard. Gotta go along with the times. And Archbishop Tommy cuts me a lot of slack”. While Chester mk. 2 (now a Labrador, but chocolate – what else) dozes happily in the sacristy.

  7. Saint110676 says:

    Glad to see that +Atticus admits some issues are “just too complex”, even for those with the grace of episcopal office. As the late Avery Dulles pointed out, when the bishops pronounce on issues for which they have little comparative competence, they lose credibility when it is time to pronounce on issues of doctrine. I am beginning to like +Atticus.

  8. JonPatrick says:

    @PostCatholic, they do not become legal immigrants until their case is heard and it is verified that they have a legitimate cause to seek asylum such as a fear of persecution, as per Title 8. Once Title 42 expires, border enforcement falls under Title 8 which is still in effect.

  9. retiredtobedlam says:

    My spidey sense tells me that there is a book in the offing. Hmmmm?

  10. Not says:


  11. BW says:

    “After all, I don’t want to be the odd man out” is the main problem with Bishops’ Conferences. After all, if everyone is wrong then no-one is to blame.

  12. PostCatholic says:

    @JonPatrick Disabuse me if I’m in error, but:
    The current situation with the end of Title 42 concerns people lining up to make an application for asylum at an official port of entry of the United States, then being given permit to enter pending a hearing. The outcome of that hearing ultimately leads to Permanent Residency status, which can then lead to citizenship.

    Where’s the illegality?

Think, proof read, preview BEFORE posting!