Reading these bishops’ almost all approving responses to the letter written to Biden by Archbishop Gomez of Los Angeles, elected head of their conference, and noting the angry disapproval of it by Cardinal Cupich of Chicago, who decried the lack of discussion beforehand, I can only conclude that the cardinal wanted a statement by committee.
He wanted in on it, obviously, and a chance to tone it down, to “craft” it (his interesting word) so as to . . . what? Be less direct?
Pope and bishops not on same pages. Tangled web here.
The U.S. bishops’ conference held back a statement on incoming President Joe Biden Wednesday morning, after officials from the Vatican Secretariat of State intervened before the statement could be released.
The statement, from conference president Archbishop Jose Gomez, took uncompromising positions on abortion, gender, and religious liberty, warning that the Biden administration’s policy agenda would advance “moral evils” on several fronts.
Joe Biden is sworn in for his second term as vice president in 2009. Credit: United States Navy.
“[A]s pastors, the nation’s bishops are given the duty of proclaiming the Gospel in all its truth and power, in season and out of season, even when that teaching is inconvenient or when the Gospel’s truths run contrary to the directions of the wider society and culture,” Archbishop Jose Gomez wrote in a statement that was expected to be released at 9:00 am Jan. 20.
“So, I must point out that our new President has pledged to pursue certain policies that would advance moral evils and threaten human life and dignity, most seriously in the areas of abortion, contraception, marriage, and gender. Of deep concern is the liberty of the Church and the freedom of believers to live according to their consciences,” Gomez added.
more more here on how bishops and Vatican have collided in re: Biden and abortion . . .
On the attack, Francis’ man in Chicago. Via Twitter! “Scathing attack.”
On Archbishop Gomez of LA, elected by his fellow bishops as president of the U.S. conference of same, who wrote the statement, which Cupich calls “ill-considered.”
Cupich is a tiger here and obviously was furious about the Gomez letter.
The vitamin D solution gets no traction.
Early in the pandemic, “trust the science!” could actually be used in a debate without attracting derisive laughter. But as the flip-flops, mistakes and, yes, lies have accumulated, a consensus seems to be forming that the health care authorities are no more trustworthy than the people running Congress or the Fed.
For proof, let’s start with vitamin D, which sure seems to lessen the severity of coronavirus infections. As the chart below illustrates (couldn’t find the source, but google “covid vitamin D” and you’ll find lots of studies that track with this data), people with higher levels of vitamin D in their bloodstream tend to experience covid-19 as a non-event while people low levels found the infection life-threatening.
There are obvious questions about causality here, so calling vitamin D a “cure” is going way too far. But if it has even a marginal effect – and the data suggest considerably more — a rational government would, you’d think, be handing out vitamin D like Halloween candy. In fact, since we’re mandating/prohibiting all kinds of other behaviors, we might expect vitamin D consumption to be required along with masks and social distancing.
Even covid-czar Anthony Fauci recently said: “If you are deficient in vitamin D, that does have an impact on your susceptibility to infection. So I would not mind recommending — and I do it myself — taking vitamin D supplements.”
So why aren’t family-sized bottles of vitamin D arriving in the mail from the CDC? A cynic might wonder if the fact that Big Pharma doesn’t make much money from cheap, widely available supplements plays a role in the government’s apparent lack of interest.
Makes a guy wonder.