US Catholic bishops sue Trump admin over suspension of refugee program funding - "For decades, the US government has chosen to admit refugees and outsourced its statutory responsibility to provide those refugees with resettlement assistance to non-profit organizations like USCCB," the lawsuit states.

1.png

The US Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) has filed a lawsuit against the Trump administration after funding was halted for its refugee resettlement program. The lawsuit is based on the Refugee Act of 1980, under which the USCCB has worked with the government to resettle more than 930,000 refugees.

"For decades, the US government has chosen to admit refugees and outsourced its statutory responsibility to provide those refugees with resettlement assistance to non-profit organizations like USCCB," the lawsuit states. "But now, after refugees have arrived and been placed in USCCB’s care, the government is attempting to pull the rug out from under USCCB’s programs by halting funding."

Shortly after President Donald Trump took office, the State Department’s Bureau of Population, Refugees, and Migration issued a suspension letter for the program. According to the lawsuit, USCCB has not received reimbursement from the State Department up to Jan. 24, despite assurances in the letter that it would. The conference is also arguing that the administration’s decision to cut off congressionally approved funding is illegal, according to Fox News.

USCCB has stated that the freeze has forced it to issue layoff notices to 50 employees in Migration and Refugee Services, more than half of its staff.

“The Catholic Church always works to uphold the common good of all and promote the dignity of the human person, especially the most vulnerable among us,” said USCCB president Archbishop Timothy Broglio, according to the Associated Press. “That includes the unborn, the poor, the stranger, the elderly and infirm, and migrants.”

“The conference suddenly finds itself unable to sustain its work to care for the thousands of refugees who were welcomed into our country and assigned to the care of the USCCB by the government after being granted legal status,” Broglio added.

Vice President JD Vance, a Catholic convert, has previously criticized the bishops' conference for resettling “illegal immigrants” to receive millions in federal funding, a reference to the resettlement program. In an interview last month, Vance argued that the conference “has, frankly, not been a good partner in common sense immigration enforcement that the American people voted for."

Article Link

Archive
 
Yea yea I get what you're trying to say. Christ is God, God is speaking in the Old Testament. I'm glad you understand the nature of the trinity.
You're speaking metaphorically and in trinity. This isn't what I'm talking about. I'm talking about jesus christ, The Son, The messiah

The Old Testament cannot contradict the New Testament
But catholics constantly say it does

So when the New Testament repeatedly says that God loves everyone, even those who reject Him, you cannot then point to the Old Testament to claim the opposite.
So jesus was lying to isaiah? Who's lying here? Jesus? Moses? Isaiah? Or your snake cult? The old testament makes no claim of christ hating anyone, I never said it did

Isaiah 63 is not saying that God does not love those who reject Him
I didn't say it did.

Christ is a King, the King of Kings. In those days when a King was away from the Kingdom for whatever reason he appointed a Steward to manage the Kingdom in his absence.
Right. In his absence. Jesus is not absent. A steward isn't necessary when the King is present

keys are historically a symbol of the office of Steward. Think of it like house sitting. You go on vacation and you put your most trusted neighbor in charge of looking after your house by giving him the keys.
Peter is not in the line of david. What God is talking about in this Isaiah passage is the messiah. In your metaphor, the messiah is the Steward.

He is making Peter his Steward over His Kingdom which spans all of creation while he is absent from Earth by virtue of being in Heaven
No he's not. He's giving him the power to perform exorcisms and witness. He's not confering any stewardship to Him. Like you said, the NT cannot contradict the OT.

all of your excuses hinge on christ needing a steward while christ is absent. But since he isn't absent, there is no need for a steward.


The office always existed,
Yes. In the old covenant, it was held by high priests in the temples. In the new covenant, jesus hold the office. Again, Peter explained this in the book of hebrews


Ask yourself, what is Peter's name?
I already know that peter/cephas/rock thing. But jesus building the church on Peter contradicts old testament.

Everything in your response is complicit on biblical authors being wrong. Peter wrote christ is the high priest. The OT says jesus is the high priest.

Why are all of your arguments identical to the excuses the pharisees used?
 
Why are all of your arguments identical to the excuses the pharisees used?
Because Catholicism is ran by jews, the jesuits are literal converso jews who slowly took it over. Notice how he says it all comes back to Peter, he's putting the church over God yet again. He's just so dumb and brainwashed he can't see beyond what his cult teaches him.
 
Because Catholicism is ran by jews, the jesuits are literal converso jews who slowly took it over. Notice how he says it all comes back to Peter, he's putting the church over God yet again. He's just so dumb and brainwashed he can't see beyond what his cult teaches him.
EYE know that, and agree wholly. I just want to hear him say it.

Church fathers this, catechism that. But never quoting jesus or the word when interpreting thr word
 
EYE know that, and agree wholly. I just want to hear him say it.

Church fathers this, catechism that. But never quoting jesus or the word when interpreting thr word
He will stop responding like a coward, he can't even answer for the pope openly lying about the Bible to cover for jews. All Catholics are jewish cucks.
 
I thought Jesus said that he had not come to replace the laws of old, though. Or did I misread that?
You're referring to Matthew 5:17 where Christ says he did not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it. To fulfill it is the key point here. The Old Testament cannot contradict the New Testament but the New Testament, but the New Testament can amend the Old Testament. Hence why when theres a perceived conflict between the two the NT wins.
I'm talking about jesus christ, The Son, The messiah
Then you have to be talking metaphysically through the trinity as Christ did not physically speak until the New Testament. In the Old Testament God was speaking.
But catholics constantly say it does
Where?

So jesus was lying to isaiah? Who's lying here? Jesus? Moses? Isaiah? Or your snake cult? The old testament makes no claim of christ hating anyone, I never said it did
I didn't say it did.
1740151902843.png

You brought up Isaiah 63:1 in response to me saying God loves everyone. If you're not trying to say Isaiah 63:1 says God does not love everyone then why bring it up in that context?
Right. In his absence. Jesus is not absent. A steward isn't necessary when the King is present
He is physically absent (except in Eucharist but that's another matter) as he ascended body and soul into Heaven. Humanity needs a physical being to perform the necessary duties of administering the Kingdom because we cannot maintain perfect communication with God through the Holy Spirit which has descended upon us. To accommodate our shortcomings a human Steward is needed.
Peter is not in the line of david.
Of course he isn't, Christ is.
What God is talking about in this Isaiah passage is the messiah.
In Isaiah 22 God is literally talking about the steward of the Kingdom of David.
In your metaphor, the messiah is the Steward.
No the Steward is the Steward and Christ is the King. Christ is David, Peter is Eliakim.
No he's not. He's giving him the power to perform exorcisms and witness. He's not confering any stewardship to Him. Like you said, the NT cannot contradict the OT.C
Christ gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven! That act is the conference of stewardship. The powers to bind and loose refer to far more than just exorcisms and witnessing. Peter and the other apostles could already do those things prior to the moment of Matthew 16:18-19, see Luke 9:1-2.

I already know that peter/cephas/rock thing. But jesus building the church on Peter contradicts old testament.
I said that the Old Testament cannot contradict the New Testament, not the other way around. Christ came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it. The New Testament can and does amend the Old Testament. That's the entire reason there's a distinction between Old and New or we'd just call the whole thing "The Testament.

The best example of this is Christ dying on the Cross for our sins. In doing so he is not abolishing the old law of ritual sacrifice for the sins of mankind, he is fulfilling it by becoming the ultimate sacrifice. A sacrifice so perfect that we no longer need to make animal sacrifices like the Old Testament commands.
 
He will stop responding like a coward, he can't even answer for the pope openly lying about the Bible to cover for jews. All Catholics are jewish cucks.
He probably doesn't know that catholcism and pharisees come from the same place

The most beautiful thing about the Kingdom of Heaven is that none of the Protestants are going to be allowed into it with us, so finally we'll get peace from these heretical retards
Ah, the common "jesus was a heretic" thing. I've heard that before. And calling christ a liar, very nice
 
Last edited:
The most beautiful thing about the Kingdom of Heaven is that none of the Protestants are going to be allowed into it with us, so finally we'll get peace from these heretical retards
Ah, the common "jesus was a heretic" thing. I've heard that before. And calling christ a liar, very nice
Then you have to be talking metaphysically through the trinity as Christ did not physically speak until the New Testament. In the Old Testament God was speaking.
Nope. God takes human form a few times in the OT. in the case of ish 63, it is the messiah, speaking to isiah in a vision.

I never said ish 63 was about hate

Humanity needs a physical being to perform the necessary duties of administering the Kingdom because we cannot maintain perfect communication with God
Says who? Where is thr scriptural passage? Christ nor any prophet says this. You're talking about old covenant stuff. Christ fulfills the need for a "physical being" or intermediary
In Isaiah 22 God is literally talking about the steward of the Kingdom of David
Yes. Jesus christ.
Christ gave Peter the keys to the Kingdom of Heaven
Yes. Writing scripture, witnessing, etc

Christ came not to abolish the law but to fulfill it.
Bingo. That includes the role of high priest, temples, etc.

The New Testament can and does amend the Old Testament.
Nope. Jesus says the opposite. What are some of these amendments?

In doing so he is not abolishing the old law of ritual sacrifice for the sins of mankind, he is fulfilling it by becoming the ultimate sacrifice. A sacrifice so perfect that we no longer need to make animal sacrifices like the Old Testament commands.
But you don't actually believe in this, because you are still saying that under the new covenant we need priests and intermediaries and "physical beings" to administer the kingdom

He fulfilled ALL the laws. Not just that of sacrifice, but ALL of them. Remember, the veil was torn. Do you know why? It has nothing to do with animal sacrifice
 
  • Feels
Reactions: browserbowser
That’s why Trump makes all these faggots, the entire NGO/Deep state blob MAD!

They sincerely believe that they have a god given RIGHT to taxpayers money.
 
Goddamn gotta love a Bonesjones slapfight, they can go all night spazzing out.
The most cordial possible fuck you for tagging me into this stupid thread, btw.
Says who? Where is thr scriptural passage?
Do you need a scripture passage to tell you the sky is blue and the grass is green? Some things are intentionally self evident.
Yes. Jesus christ.
No, Christ is the King, not the Steward. The King is not the Steward. Christ is David, Peter is Eliakim.
Yes. Writing scripture, witnessing, etc
Are you just going to not acknowledge the obvious and established nature of the Keys as a symbol of the office of Steward?
What are some of these amendments?
No longer having to make animal sacrifices, no longer having to be circumcised, no longer having to adhere to kosher when it comes to what we eat, etc.
Remember, the veil was torn. Do you know why?
Hebrews 10:19-22
 
  • Like
Reactions: Hassou Tobi
Despite the Greeks being very cucked by Turkey, the Jesuits and CIA(and all know what that stands for...) it is nice in moments like these being Orthodox. Not that terrible scandals and treachery isn't known, just not this organized and global in reach. Hopefully Rome doesn't roll "red diaper Jesuit" again when their next turn comes up.

Also latins and cooky protestant youtube evangelicals is the definition of two retards fighting
 
To be fair, I'm not seeing it as a total loss, exhausting of reading the same posts retyped over and over can be. It's nice seeing the apologetics if nothing else.
I mean I have gained an appreciation for the experience of arguing with a smug retard who thinks being insufferable to the point of no one wanting to engage with them is the same thing as being smart. I'm sure Null deals with this kind of thing all the time.
 
The most beautiful thing about the Kingdom of Heaven is that none of the Protestants are going to be allowed into it with us, so finally we'll get peace from these heretical retards
I came to this thread to post this video.
 
  • Winner
Reactions: Revelator
Back