Church official slams Hillary over anti-Catholic emails: ‘scheming, robotic liar’

WikiLeaks’ release of an email chain where senior Hillary Clinton campaign staffers mocked Catholics and Catholicism prompted a powerful Pennsylvania Catholic bishop to blast the Democratic presidential nominee.

Archbishop Charles Chaput / Source: Archdiocese of Philadelphia
Archbishop Charles Chaput / Source: Archdiocese of Philadelphia

Writing in his weekly column, Archbishop Charles Chaput demanded that Clinton, who he pegged as “a scheming, robotic liar with a lifelong appetite for power and an entourage riddled with anti-Catholic bigots,” denounce the emails, but added that he didn’t believe she would.

The “contemptuously anti-Catholic emails” he referred to mocked the Catholic faith and its practitioners for their “backward” beliefs in social issues such as abortion and marriage.

“Of course it would be wonderful for the Clinton campaign to repudiate the content of these ugly WikiLeaks emails. All of us backward-thinking Catholics who actually believe what Scripture and the Church teach would be so very grateful.”

Catholic and Catholic organizations blasted the emails immediately after WikiLeaks published them Tuesday, and called for the resignation of communications director Jennifer Palmieri.

Chaput actually began his Archdiocese of Philadelphia column by taking on President Barack Obama for the “cultural damage” his liberal policies have inflicted on the country, before turning his attention to the Democratic presidential nominee.

But bad can always get worse.  I’m thinking, of course, of the contemptuously anti-Catholic emails exchanged among members of the Clinton Democratic presidential campaign team and released this week by WikiLeaks. A sample:  Sandy Newman, president of Voices for Progress, emailed John Podesta, now the head of Hillary Clinton’s campaign, to ask about whether “the bishops opposing contraceptive coverage” could be the tinder for a revolution. “There needs to be a Catholic Spring, in which Catholics themselves demand the end of a middle ages [sic] dictatorship,” Newman writes.

Of course, Newman added, “this idea may just reveal my total lack of understanding of the Catholic church, the economic power it can bring to bear against nuns and priests who count on it for their maintenance.” Still, he wondered, how would one “plant the seeds of a revolution”? John Podesta replied that “We created Catholics in Alliance for the Common Good to organize for a moment like this . . . likewise Catholics United” (emphasis added).

 

Chaput described the choice between the two major party nominees as “a vulgar, boorish lout and disrespecter of women, with a serious impulse control problem; or a scheming, robotic liar with a lifelong appetite for power and an entourage riddled with anti-Catholic bigots.”

He concluded with a nod to the pro-choice movement.

“In a nation where ‘choice’ is now the unofficial state religion, the menu for dinner is remarkably small.”

Sign up for our morning blast HERE

H/T: Washington Examiner

Comments

Latest Articles