I am starting this interview from four years ago five minutes into about an 11 minute segment. Watch where Bishop Budde flat out says she believes in a woman’s right to deport her unborn child by hiring a hitman to take her/him out through murder. Bishop Budde isn’t the one to lecture Donald Trump on any moral issue. Saint Mother Teresa of Calcutta and Pope Francis could do it, Cardinal Gregory could also, but not Bishop Budde. Let her know!
37 comments:
Her pretending to be a bishop is both silly and offensive.
Wilton Gregory and Mariann Budde....two peas in the same pod. They both disgust me.
Good work, Father McDonald. She is the poster child for why so many Episcopalians have given up on the Church of “what is happening now.”
Hey, K, this is what you and Budde voted for:
https://thefederalist.com/2025/01/23/democrats-confirm-abortion-extremism-by-blocking-protections-for-babies-born-alive-after-botched-abortions/
Father McDonald,
I guarantee this will make you smile:
https://pjmedia.com/stephen-kruiser/2025/01/24/the-morning-briefing-hallelujah-trump-continues-to-empty-out-the-bidengarland-gulag-n4936310
Archbishop Vigano may be on to something:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/01/archbishop-vigano-chair-peter-is-not-pope-emissary/
Father McDonald, the following is the transcript from last year's Meet The Press segment that featured Cardinal Gregory, as well as Episcopal Church Bishop Ret. Reverend Mariann Budde.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/wilton-cardinal-gregory-ret-reverend-mariann-budde-face-the-nation-transcript-03-31-2024/
=======
Deo gratias for the holy, humble, yet unwavering manner in which Cardinal Gregory promoted the Culture of Life in regard to the abortion issue. It is a shame that Bishop Budde refused to join Cardinal Gregory's holy defense of unborn children.
Jesus Christ had spoken through Cardinal Gregory. Satan had spoken through Bishop Budde.
May Bishop Budde embrace the True Church's holy teachings.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Hey, K, read this article if you dare:
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/pro-life-activist-prosecuted-biden-doj-reacts-trump-pardon-i-want-give-him-hug
And you don't think you are voting for evil when you vote for Dems?
Gregory is a disaster. Obviously, you do not know much about him. Did he discipline fake Catholic Biden and tell him not to receive Holy Communion like Archbishop Cordileone did to Pelosi and Bishop Paprocki did to Dick Durbin? Wake me up when you find the evidence. Gregory also cruelly and through ultra vires action suppressed many successful TLMs at parishes which are now on life support. Stop with the Pollyanna and get real.
Here are examples of Bishop Budde having countered, unfortunately, Cardinal Gregory's holy promotion of the Culture of Life:
-- In response to a question that had pertained to President Biden:
CARDINAL GREGORY: "But like a number of Catholics, he picks and chooses dimensions of the faith to highlight while ignoring or even contradicting other parts. That - there is a phrase that we have used in the past, a 'cafeteria Catholic,' you choose that which is attractive, and dismiss that which is challenging."
BISHOP BUDDE: "Or as Thomas Aquinas would say, you, you allow your conscience to guide you."
=======
ED O'KEEFE: "Is there- Is there something on the menu he's (Joseph Biden) not ordering? In your view? So to speak.
CARDINAL GREGORY: Well, I - I would say there are things, especially in terms of the life issues, there are things that he chooses to ignore, or he uses the- the current situation as a political pawn rather than saying, Look, my church believes this. I'm a good Catholic, I would like to believe this. Rather than to twist and turn some dimensions of the faith as a political advantage."
BISHOP BUDDE: "It's also possible to be a practitioner of the faith as a public leader, and not require everyone that you lead in your country to-to be guided by all of the precepts of your faith. Right?"
=======
CARDINAL GREGORY: "The issues of life begin at the very beginning. And they conclude at natural death. And you can't, you can't pick and choose.
"You're either one who respects life in all of its dimensions. Or you have to step aside and say, I'm not pro life."
BISHOP BUDDE: "I love the spectrum of life. I think you can be an adherent of the spectrum of life, and still respect a woman's right to choose her in reproductive health, and including when - when to have an abortion in the early stages of pregnancy.
"So I'll just say that, as a Christian, I believe that that's possible, and still hold to the full spectrum of life."
=======
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas,
As usual you miss the point. Words without action are meaningless. Has Gregory disciplined fake Catholic Biden? NO. By the way, have you ever read the Summa Theologica? If you had you would understand that the Angelic Doctor referred to a properly informed conscience. Budde is a con artist and a fraud living in a $2 million dollar mansion.
Mark Thomas,
Chew through this. Holy, holies!
https://www.thecatholicmonitor.com/2023/03/former-editor-in-chief-of-catholic.html
I wonder if K has fled the Country to his spiritual home of Cuba!
I see the fake priest has gone radio silent!
Father McDonald:
In your post you say that Bishop Budde “lectured” Donald Trump. Others have used words like “scolded” or “castigated.” I have watched her entire homily and none of these words seem apposite. What I heard was a respectful, heartfelt plea for mercy, delivered with gentleness and kindness, not to mention considerable courage. Here again is the entire homily:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwwaEuDeqM8
Bishop Budde’s plea to President Trump comes at 12:30.
Also, if I understand correctly, you seem to be suggesting that no religious leader has any authority to make such a plea, or perhaps indeed to take any moral position, unless they ALSO agree with the Catholic position on abortion. To so many other Christian clergy, as well as clergy of other religions, who in good conscience, albeit mistaken, are unable to see what we see and unable to believe what we believe, this will surely come across as an extreme position that is not only disrespectful but even arrogant. Is it really the position of the Catholic Church that unless a member of the clergy adheres to our position on abortion, nothing they say on any other moral issue has any value and should be ignored? If so, haven’t we just thrown ecumenical and interfaith dialogue out the window and, with it, any hope of changing hearts and minds?
Mark J.
TJM:
My last comment for you got garbled in the editing. Here is the ungarbled text:
Re your comment at 10:19 a.m.—Bishop Budde explicitly refers to her support for a woman’s right to choose abortion, guided by her conscience, “in the early stages of pregnancy.” See the quotes from the transcript in Mark Thomas’s comment at 4:42 p.m. Whatever time period is included in the “early stages,” I suspect she does not include any period beyond viability. Of course, I could be wrong and, in any event, it would not justify her position on abortion seen through the eyes of, for example, Catholic moral teaching.
Mark J.
Thank you Mark for the comment. My criticism of Bishop Budde is her inconsistency. In the interview with Cardinal Gregory, she agrees that Christians, following their conscience, can disagree with certain moral tenets of their faith, like abortion. If that is the case, President Trump’s conscience tells him to deport those who have entered the USA illegally, be they good, bad or indifferent. He dissents from Catholic and I presume Episcopalian views of mercy and this is a decision of his conscience. Personally, I think Bishop Budde’s concept of conscience is seriously flawed as is President Trumps, but all things being equal, who is to judge Budde or Trump on their mistakes? From a pastoral point of view, Budde was preaching directly to a non-Episcopalian. I don’t know what Trump is, but his form of Christianity is his own with gnostic elements as is Budde’s concept of conscience. She should have engaged the concept of mercy in a different way. Then to lump deportation on a call to acknowledge a biological and DNA fact that there are only two genders, male and female, and pleading from a manipulative form of trying to change her man, Trump, by saying it makes transgendered people feel despair was silly in a homily.
Mark this will give you, K and Mark Thomas the sads:
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2025/01/24/exclusive_trump_revives_mexico_city_policy_rescinds_biden_abortion_initiatives_152248.html
I think the armchair quarterbacks here would be wise to stop opining on President Trump's morality'. He's a veritable Saint next to the evil, corrupt, fake Catholic Joe Biden.
President Trump is a peacemaker, not a warmaker like Biden who never found a war he did not like funding. Hostages are getting freed in Gaza and it looks like the Ukraine nightmare may be coming to an end. Does that give you guys the sads?
President Trump is kicking out illegal aliens, many of whom are violent and dangerous, while Biden was fine letting them in, raping and killing US citizens merrily on their way. The Laken Law is in response to that.Then we have Pope Francis who while virtue-signaling over Trump's deportations, just tightened up laws on illegally entering the Vatican State.
President Trump is pardoning old grandmas Biden sent to prison for protesting abortion and rescinding Biden's taxpayer funding of them. Sounds much more moral than Biden and for those of you who voted for Biden.
I could go on, but I think you get the drift, or at least I hope so.
Maybe Pope Francis will excommunicate Tom Homan for pointing out the Pope’s hypocrisy:
https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2025/01/lifelong-catholic-border-czar-tom-homan-fires-back/
To: Mark J.
Mark, I agree that Bishop Budde delivered her homily peacefully. I agree that that Bishop Budde had rendered unto President Trump a "heartfelt plea for mercy."
I wonder though if the following would have better served Bishop Budde/her cause:
Mister Donald Trump has demonstrated for years that he is thin-skinned and aggressive. He has reacted often in nasty, hateful fashion, to folks who, in his opinion, have "challenged" his views.
Despite her cordial tone, it was a given that President Trump would react negatively to Bishop Budde's heartfelt address in question.
If anything, President Trump would have viewed the ecumenical event as the wrong time and place to have been "challenged" by Bishop Budde. That would have sufficed to have launched President Trump into anger mode.
Perhaps Bishop Budde should have addressed President Trump via a private meeting between the two. Had President Trump refused said meeting, Bishop Budde could then have gone public with her plea in question.
That would have at least shattered the narrative that Bishop Budde had employed the ecumenical event in question as a "setup" to attack President Trump.
=======
Mark J, I hope that you continue to contribute to Father McDonald's important blog. You are an important, thought-provoking, commenter.
Pax.
Mark Thomas
Mark Thomas,
Maybe you’d be “thin skinned” if you had the forces of Hell thrown at you 24/7 and had been shot at twice by mostly peaceful violent people from the Left. Fortunately the sane voters restored President Trump to power to undo all of the evil perpetrated on the American people by Obama and Biden.
The faux bishop is a passive aggressive evil woman so I can appreciate how someone like you would applaud her like you adore the corrupt nasty man running our Church at the moment.
Father McDonald:
Thank you for your response. This is a good conversation. It has prompted me to research the Episcopal Church’s position an abortion. I was somewhat surprised at what I discovered because it is not as stark as “it is all up to the individual conscience.” Clearly, Bishop Budde was trying to summarize, in the context of the time constraints of a wide-ranging interview, a more complex and nuanced moral position.
Here are some links. You yourself are doubtless familiar with the Episcopal Church’s official position, but I suspect many readers of the Blog may not be, as indeed I wasn’t:
https://www.episcopalchurch.org/ogr/summary-of-general-convention-resolutions-on-abortion-and-womens-reproductive-health/
https://episcopalarchives.org/cgi-bin/acts/acts_resolution.pl?resolution=1988-C047
The first link is to a recent document “Summary of General Convention Resolutions on Abortion and Women's Reproductive Health,” which early in the text includes a link to the 1988 Resolution adopting a Statement on Childbirth and Abortion included in the second link above. At the end of this Summary is a list of all relevant Resolutions.
It is worth highlighting some of the language from the 1988 Statement:
“All human life is sacred. Hence, it is sacred from its inception until death. The Church takes seriously its obligation to help form the consciences of its members concerning this sacredness. . . .
We regard all abortion as having a tragic dimension, calling for the concern and compassion of all the Christian community.
While we acknowledge that in this country it is the legal right of every woman to have a medically safe abortion, as Christians we believe strongly that if this right is exercised, it should be used only in extreme situations. We emphatically oppose abortion as a means of birth control, family planning, sex selection, or any reason of mere convenience.
In those cases where an abortion is being considered, members of this Church are urged to seek the dictates of their consciences in prayer, to seek the advice and counsel of members of the Christian community and where appropriate the sacramental life of this Church. . . .
We believe that legislation concerning abortions will not address the root of the problem. We therefore express our deep conviction that any proposed legislation on the part of national or state governments regarding abortions must take special care to see that individual conscience is respected, and that the responsibility of individuals to reach informed decisions in this matter is acknowledged and honored.”
Mark J.
Mark Thomas:
Thank you for your gracious remarks about my comments. I can assure you the feeling is mutual.
I also appreciate your suggestion regarding an alternative approach. Perhaps that would indeed have been the wiser and more productive course.
This said, as I mentioned in another thread, I do wonder whether Bishop Budde would have used the occasion of her homily to deliver her plea had President Trump, during his inaugural address, not already singled himself out as effectively chosen/anointed by God: “I felt then, and I believe even more so now, that my life was saved by God to make America great again.” Having made such a public claim, Bishop Budde might have thought it appropriate to follow the venerable biblical tradition of using a prophetic voice to speak publicly to President Trump as the self-proclaimed leader of the nation anointed by God. But again, you might very well still be correct that another approach would have been the wiser, and more productive, course.
Mark J.
TJM:
Re your comment at 10:48 a.m. on Tom Homan’s remarks, Tom Homan is just being silly here. The issue is not whether Vatican City has a nice big wall around it but who is permitted to enter Vatican City.
Vatican City is open to all visitors provided they respect the religious nature of the site:
https://www.romehacks.com/can-anybody-visit-the-vatican/#:~:text=The%20Vatican%20is%20open%20to,anyone%20can%20explore%20its%20treasures.
Homan would have been on much stronger ground had he emphasized Vatican City’s strict immigration laws:
https://zenit.org/2024/08/29/vatican-citys-immigration-law-one-of-the-strictest-in-europe/
But given its extremely small size as a state, comparing the situation of Vatican City to that of a typical nation-state is like comparing apples and oranges. Moreover, despite its diminutive size, Vatican City HAS permitted migrants to reside there on occasion:
https://apnews.com/article/pope-francis-europe-middle-east-religion-christianity-960363771a9963bc3300002a7d256501
More importantly, what you and many others, including perhaps Tom Homan, fail to understand is that Pope Francis is not encouraging illegal migration. Instead, he has called upon developed nations to be more generous in their attitude to migrants by permitting more LEGAL pathways for migrants. If more legal migration were permitted, then this would greatly reduce illegal migration and perhaps eliminate it altogether, at least on the part of the great majority of migrants who are not bad actors such as hardened criminals or gang members. See, e.g.:
https://thehill.com/latino/4853707-pope-francis-migration/
“Brothers and sisters, we can all agree on one thing: Migrants should not be in those seas and in those lethal deserts. But it is not through more restrictive laws, it is not with the militarization of borders, it is not with rejection that we will obtain this result . . .
“Instead, we will obtain it by extending safe and legal access routes for migrants, providing refuge for those who free [sic] from war, violence, persecution and various disasters; we will obtain it by promoting in every way a global governance of migration based on justice, fraternity and solidarity. And by joining forces to combat human trafficking, to stop the criminal traffickers who mercilessly exploit the misery of others.”
Regarding the premises underlying these sentiments, see, e.g.:
https://cmsny.org/wp-content/uploads/FrancisEssay8-21-15.pdf#:~:text=Migrants%20present%20a%20particular%20challenge%20for%20me%2C,relate%20and%20favor%20the%20recognition%20of%20others!
[continued]
[continuation]
Now, it is also true that Pope Francis has very recently condemned the attempt to deport millions of undocumented immigrants from the United States as disgraceful:
https://www.cnn.com/2025/01/19/world/pope-says-trump-immigrant-deportations-disgrace-intl-latam/index.html
But he is in good company here. In the grandfather deportation case, Fong Yue Ting v. United States, 149 U.S. 698 (1893), in which Congress targeted Chinese laborers who were unable to meet certain evidentiary requirements proving legal residence, and in which the majority denied that deportation was “punishment,” there were three extremely strong dissents. Here are two. Justice Brewer said:
“[I]t needs no citation of authorities to support the proposition that deportation is punishment. Everyone knows that to be forcibly taken away from home, and family, and friends, and business, and property, and sent across the ocean to a distant land is punishment; and that oftentimes most severe and cruel.” (page 740)
And Justice Field stated:
“The punishment is beyond all reason in its severity. It is out of all proportion to the alleged offense. It is cruel and unusual. As to its cruelty, nothing can exceed a forcible deportation from a country of one's residence, and the breaking up of all the relations of friendship, family, and business there contracted. The laborer may be seized at a distance from his home, his family, and his business, and taken before the judge for his condemnation, without permission to visit his home, see his family, or complete any unfinished business. Mr. Madison well pictures its character in his powerful denunciation of the alien law of 1798, in his celebrated report upon the resolutions, from which we have cited, and concludes, as we have seen, that if a banishment of the sort described be not a punishment, and among the severest of punishments, it will be difficult to imagine a doom to which the name can be applied.” (page 759).
And please notice that we (and Bishop Budde) are not talking about hardened criminals or gang members, but (at least for the most part) those undocumented immigrants who may have lived in the United States for years, even decades.
Mark J.
TJM:
“Maybe you’d be ‘thin skinned’ if you had the forces of Hell thrown at you 24/7 and had been shot at twice by mostly peaceful violent people from the Left.”
You are propagating more Trump Campaign/Cult misinformation—unless you know something the rest of us don’t.
First, no shots were fired during the second assassination attempt.
Second, the evidence that the would-be assassins were “from the Left" is murky at best, although arguably you might be able to make a stronger case for that claim regarding the second would-be assassin. For details regarding the assassination attempts, including possible motives and political affiliations of the perpetrators, see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Donald_Trump_in_Pennsylvania
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Matthew_Crooks
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Attempted_assassination_of_Donald_Trump_in_Florida
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ryan_Wesley_Routh
What you call “the Forces of Hell thrown at you 24/7,” and assuming you are referring to what Trump sympathizers call “lawfare,” others call an attempt to ensure legal accountability and bringing to justice for serious criminal activity. Elsewhere you have suggested that Trump didn’t need to run again and did so only for the good of the country. So, I suppose the benefit of escaping legal jeopardy had nothing to do with it, any more than in Netanyahu’s case, right?
Mark J.
TJM:
For the last few days on another thread, I have asked you the following question—at least twice and probably three times: Do you believe in liberal democracy and free and fair elections and that those who lose them should accept that result and “get over it,” including when it is Trump and MAGA who lose?
This question was prompted by your own statement that elections have consequences and that the Democrats lost and should “get over it.”
You have still not answered this question. So, I ask it again here in the (perhaps vain) hope that it will get your attention and finally elicit an answer: Do you, or don’t you, believe in liberal democracy and free and fair elections and that those who lose them should accept that result and “get over it,” including when it is Trump and MAGA who lose?
I believe you owe us an answer so that we can put your incessant and vigorously pro-Trump/MAGA comments into proper perspective.
Mark J.
Mark Thomas,
Another story of President Trump protecting Americans from the thugs Biden let into the US. Have you no decency, have you no shame?
https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ice-arrests-3-tren-de-aragua-gang-members-amid-mass-deportation-push
Mark Thomas,
Fake Catholic Biden did this and President Trump is fixing this. Does this give you the sads?
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/01/25/trump-restores-single-sex-jails-transgenders-sent-back-to-mens-prisons/
How evil and manipulative is the New York Slimes? Here is Exhibit A:
https://hotair.com/david-strom/2025/01/25/nyt-a-fetus-is-just-a-clump-of-cells-if-they-america-it-is-a-child-if-the-mother-is-undocumented-n3799149
Mark Thomas,
Fake Catholic Biden supported this. President Trump fixed it. Does this give you the sads that perversion is no longer government policy? Will Pope Francis send President Trump a thank you note?
https://redstate.com/streiff/2025/01/25/trumps-education-department-fires-porn-czar-and-dismantles-his-office-n2184801
Mark,
You have become like Mark Thomas, simply blithely ignoring facts and truths that undermine your leftwing (nonpartisan LOL) narrative. How many bullets have you taken and still went on? Obama would have run screaming and yelling like the little girl he is. You and your kind would prefer innocent Americans die in the name of open borders and "social justice" rather than control the borders and vet who comes into the US just like they do at the Vatican. I recall during the pandemic the Biden Regime allowed unvaccinated illegal aliens into the US while demanding everyone in the US be vaccinated or lose their livelihoods like men and women in the military. The average high school graduate has more common sense than the typical academic. The Left is a neo-Communist front which has overtaken the modern Democratic Party and much of the media and academia. It is determined to undermine families, parental control, and relegate the Church to the catacombs. Why else would fake Catholic Biden prosecute grandmas for protesting the abortionatoriums?.
I am not impressed with your deflections, evasions, nor your semantics. President Trump is restoring American greatness, the rule of law, and derivatively Western civilization. Davos and the fascists in Brussels are reeling. My fervent hope is that we very soon are rid of the leftist, secularist running the Church and the cardinals elect a MCGA (Make Catholicism Great Again) pope.
TJM:
What poppycock! I taught Immigration Law for 35 years (and practiced as a consultant to a firm of business immigration lawyers for some of that time). I have NEVER denied the importance of effective border control. What I HAVE supported and advocated for (aligned with significant bipartisan support in Congress) is comprehensive immigration reform that would combine (a) effective control of the border, (b) an expansion of legal immigration, including a temporary worker program for noncitizens coming to perform nonprofessional jobs that are not just temporary positions (something that currently does not exist in the law), and (c) a compassionate and appropriate “legalization” program for those undocumented immigrants who have been in the United States for several years, including the “Dreamers.”
This approach has had significant bipartisan support for about three decades. Obama could have achieved it during the first two years of his first term but was distracted by his efforts to avert a global financial crash and achieve healthcare reform. Trump could have achieved it during his first term and indeed seemed to be open to overtures from a bipartisan group to this end, only to waffle, vacillate, and change his mind, doubtless for political reasons (not least of which was preserving the immigration issue as a cudgel to demonize immigrants so he could continue to use it as a campaign issue), together with the influence of the rabidly anti-immigrant Stephen Miller.
We who know something about immigration law also KNOW how to fix the problem. But instead of fulfilling their duty to govern, cynical, self-serving politicians in Washington D.C. prefer instead to do whatever is expedient to cling to power. Another instance of our corrupt political system.
My fervent hope is that Trump will use some political capital during his second term to finally fix the problem when the solutions are readily available. It may all depend on how much influence the Stephen Miller continues to wield over the President.
Mark J.
TJM:
You still have not answered my question—for the fourth time. So, unless you deny it, I think we can all reasonably assume that you do NOT believe in liberal democracy and free and fair elections and that those who lose them should accept that result and “get over it,” including when it is Trump and MAGA who lose.
Well, at least we now know where we stand with you!
Mark J.
Mark,
First, we are a Republic, not a democracy. Secondly, I believe in free and fair elections; it is you and your ilk who do not. You want rigged elections to "elect" the "right" people, i.e. liberal fascists. Mail in voting is an affront to "free and fair" elections. There is no chain of custody. That is how Biden got elected in 2020. France abolished mail-in voting in 1975 due to widespread fraud. Your side also opposes Voter ID which is required in almost all first world countries. Ironically, you had to have a face ID to get into the Democratic Convention in Chicago this past year but not to vote in an election in most Dem controlled states. So, knock it off. By the way, Tom Homan, personally arrested an illegal alien from Thailand, a child rapist in Chicago. The rapist was there because of Biden but is leaving courtesy of President Trump. Have you no shame, have you no decency?
Mark,
Here's a chaser for you. Apparently not all Democrats are braindead:
https://www.breitbart.com/politics/2025/01/26/nyc-mayor-eric-adams-relationship-with-president-trump-makes-democrats-squirm/
Post a Comment