Open borders and the Catholic elite
During his visit this week, the Pope has made repeated comments critical of immigration enforcement efforts–such as they are–in the U.S. His primary concerns are not the sovereignty and security of our country. Open borders benefit Catholic churches looking to fill their pews and collection baskets. The Vatican and American bishops, led by radical L.A. Cardinal Roger Mahony, have long promoted immigration anarchy and lawlesness. Their campaign continues:
More than 45,000 people filled Nationals Park on a clear spring day, as the pope, wearing scarlet vestments, led the service from an altar erected in centerfield of the recently inaugurated baseball stadium. Rows of red-robed church leaders joined him. The enthusiastic crowd burst into cheers when Benedict entered the stadium in his popemobile.
His homily was more somber. Benedict examined American society, saying he detected anger and alienation, increasing violence and a “growing forgetfulness of God.”
“Americans have always been a people of hope,” he said. “Your ancestors came to this country with the experience of finding new freedom and opportunity.
“To be sure, this promise was not experienced by all the inhabitants of this land; one thinks of the injustices endured by the native American peoples and by those brought here forcibly from Africa as slaves.”
It was not the first time on the trip that the pontiff has delicately critiqued his host nation. Speaking to his American bishops Wednesday, he said the U.S. must be welcoming to immigrants, helping them to flourish in their new homes.
Following a White House visit, a joint statement from the U.S. and the Vatican hinted that Benedict raised concerns with President Bush about punitive immigration laws. It said the leaders discussed “the need for a coordinated policy regarding immigration, especially the humane treatment of immigrants and the well-being of their families.”
It’s one thing to show compassion to legal immigrants, legitimate refugees and asylees, and those abused and mistreated by smugglers. It’s quite another to support the systematic undermining of an orderly immigration and entrance system that imposes limits, eligibility requirements, criminal background checks, medical screening, and a commitment to assimilation. There is nothing Christian about facilitating illicit, illegal activity like this:
The Vatican donated at least $20,000 to build a shelter for Central American immigrants traveling to the USA, angering immigration control advocates as Pope Benedict XVI begins his first official U.S. visit.
The Pontifical Commission for Latin America, which reports to the pope, sent the money in January to help the Brothers on the Path charity construct a $120,000 shelter in Ixtepec in southern Mexico, the Vatican confirmed Tuesday.Many Catholic churches in the USA and Mexico have programs to aid immigrants, but few receive direct support from the Vatican, said Alejandro Solalinde, a priest and director of the project.
The donation comes at a delicate time, as the United States fortifies its southern border and the number of Central Americans crossing illegally is high. The area around Ixtepec is a major conduit for Central American migrants who ride freight trains to the U.S. border.
The illegal alien sanctuary movement sabotages the very compassion it purports to defend.
Brooke Levitske at the Acton Institute put it well:
…[I]llegal immigration raises two separate matters of conscience, which pro-sanctuary Christians blur and equate. The first is the question of immediate need and the Christian duty to extend compassion. The second is the long-term issue of how best to preserve the common good.
To deal with the first: Scripturally speaking, it seems clear that giving immediate, material assistance to anyone in need is always right, whether to an enemy soldier bleeding alone in a ditch or to the child of an illegal immigrant family in ones church with an urgent medical need. If an individual feels compelled to assist an illegal immigrant in some tangible way, his conscience should be free to do so. Political circumstances should not condition acts of mercy or evangelization for us any more than they did for Christ, who associated with Samaritans, tax collectors, and the so-called dregs of society. It is part of Christian duty to minister to others, no matter what they have done or how they arrived on ones doorstep.
With that said, it seems inadvisable to the church, as a societal institution, to disobey the law to protect illegal immigrants from deportation. Christ expected his followers to treat criminals in prison the way they would treat him, but he said nothing about busting them out of prison. The church has a tremendous interest, morally and practically, in preserving the rule of law. From a moral perspective, Scripture teaches that we are to submit to the governing authorities appointed by God. Churches especially ought to honor conscientious immigrants who follow the laws of the land and not undermine their difficult and virtuous choices by systematically condoning illegal behavior. And practically, American churches ought to venerate and cherish the law because it is the guarantor of their religious freedom.
…While there is room to debate how well the U.S. has protected its borders, we should acknowledge both its right to do so and the complexity of our national security situation. We need to have patience with the present laws even as we seek to improve them through due process. It is also important to remember that law is not meant to abolish suffering, but only to prevent injustice.
C.S. Lewis wrote in The Abolition of Man that a hard heart is no infallible protection against a soft head, but a soft heart does not guarantee right thinking, either. Disregarding the rule of law to help illegal immigrants is a paradoxical way of hurting them. The rule of law is the sustainer of the free and prosperous society that draws immigrants to the States. It is something immigrants’ own countries often cannot guarantee them, and it is what makes ours look so appealing. And if we shirk the rule of law if laws of entry can be applied to some immigrants but not to others we are cheating all immigrants out of the kind of society they are seeking in the first place.
Catholic elites can afford to harangue us about our perceived lack of “humanity.” Fact is, we remain the most generous and welcoming nation in the world to those who line up and play by the rules. It is not heretical to challenge the unholy alliance between the open borders lobby and the church establishment. If the Vatican had its way, we’d be paying for every last organ transplant for every last illegal alien patient in the world.
***
Question: Have you heard a single Catholic leader express compassion or outrage about the murder of young Jamiel Shaw in Roger Mahoney’s sanctuary of Los Angeles by an illegal alien gang member?
Commenter Granite asks: “What would His Holiness have to say if, hordes of Muslims who happened to have entered Italy illegally and were descending upon the Vatican; who, while acting upon last Friday’s sermon by the Muslim cleric in Ramallah, to conquer Rome, “the Crusader capital”, were in the meantime in need of food, water, and shelter? Would he want to keep them out of the Vatican?”
In fact, at least one Catholic leader has voiced concern about uncontrolled mass immigration of Muslims to Italy and the threat it poses:
Cardinal Giacomo Biffi based his argument on a trenchant analysis of the cultural (not racial) roots of the Italian nation. The London Daily Telegraph (September 16, 2000) quotes him:
“The criteria for admitting immigrants can never be just economic. It is necessary to concern oneself seriously with saving the identity of the nation.” Italy was not an “uninhabited region” lacking in history and traditions, which was fit to be “indiscriminately populated.” While it could admit anyone it wanted, no one had a “right of invasion.” He urged politicians to heed his words, since “not all of the cultures of those newly arrived are in favor of living together.” …
He said he had recently aired the same views with a government minister. “I said, ‘If you really have the good of Italy at heart, and want to spare a lot of suffering, then you can’t allow all the immigrants in.’” He said he had warned the minister that civil unrest would be one of the consequences if immigration was not religious-selective. He told the minister: “I’m surprised you still haven’t thought things through.” He added: “I don’t know how you’re going to cope with Friday as a holiday, polygamy, discrimination against women, and the fundamentalism of Muslims, for whom politics and religion are the same thing. Do your sums properly.”
***
Update: Tom Tancredo weighs in.
***
Previous:
Catholic church lobbies for open borders
Google “Open borders Catholic church.”
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Hot Air » Blog Archive » Tancredo to Pope: Kindly quit being such an amnesty shill, your holiness
- Pope Schmope and the illegal alien agenda | The TIW Blog
- The Other McCain: Deport the Pope?
- Catholicism and Immigration « The Autopsy
- Rhymes With Right
- Michelle Malkin and the Catholics-when-convenient crowd « Becoming Hinged
- UNCoRRELATED
- HBO Has Got To Go
- The Benedict Chronicles at No Man’s Blog
- Michelle Malkin » No, I’m not Bill Maher
- Catholics Play the “Discrimination” Card
- No, Malkin is not Maher | The Anchoress
- Neocon News » Daily Quick Hits 4/20/08
- thesilentmajorityspeaks.com » Blog Archive » Pope Benedict, please explain….
- Michelle Malkin » The WSJ’s open-borders obsessive compulsives
- catholicnews.org
- When Liberalism Kills
- Michelle Malkin » Open-borders lawsuit: English-only rule creates “hostile” school environment
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Open Borders Lobby, Sanctuary Cities
Legal Insurrection
» Pelosi's Abortion Land Mine Explodes
Weekly Standard
» Obama's Talking PointsSister Toldjah
» The anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall – and how the far left still hasn’t given upNewsBusters.org
» Politico: Conservatives Ousted Scozzafava Because She's A WomanWeekly Standard
» Ben Nelson Demands Stupak Language in Senate Bill
xler8bmw – I would suggest to you that Tancredo’s theory on why the Pope might want Mexican immigrants in America has NOTHING to do with this conversation.
Furthermore, anyone that thinks so should not comment on someone else’s intelligence
#96 it has everything to do with it!
Wow – I can only hope that is the silliest thing M.M. posts on this blog. The first motive is debatable. The second is not. The idea that illegal immigrants fill collection baskets is too funny to laugh at.
(OK, prove it!)
I will. I’ll let others speak for their diocese. In Los Angeles, there is an annual collection called “Together in Mission”. It is intended to support parishes, including schools, that are not fiscally self-supporting. I trust you don’t need to look at the program brochures to determine the demographics of these subsidized parishes.
The pope’s overall speech about America was great, but I agree that it is more about butts in the pews and he lost me on this one.
Out of bounds Pope Benedict, nunya business!
Good point, Corona, and one that I hadn’t even considered in my remarks just above, albeit related to a different argument from the one I was making – that it was an irresponsible statement from the beginning, not that it was an inaccurate statement.
Tancredo’s theories have nothing to do with the words that come out of the Popes mouth (Period)
Wow. Pot? Meet kettle. Kettle, pot.
I have just two words. Sarcasm and joke.
That was my impression as well. I’m with Michelle on this issue but I’m not convinced the Holy Father has any objection to “orderly” immigration. And for sure, some of these ultra liberal Bishops, especially those who lost control over those non-celibate priest, need to follow the laws. All of our laws. Period.
I haven’t read all the comments, but as a Catholic this kind of preaching makes me ill. If the Church is going to involve itself in American politics re: illegal immigration, why can’t it involve itself in prohibiting pro-abortion “catholics” from receiving communion?
This is exactly why I’m not getting my kid baptized. Too much Hispanic butt-kissing. Oh yeah, that and the sex abuse.
We were refugees in Rome while waiting to come to the US. My parents were turned away at first by the VAtican when they requested medical care for my infant sister who had extremely high temperature. Eventually, they gave her care, but only after my father shook the dust off of his shoes off (from the Bible, when JEsus told his desciples to do that if not accepted). The VAtican is guarded by guards and you need a special passport to get in. The Pope needs to look at his own house which is way too lavish for a man of God, as he claims to be, and stop telling us what to do. Also, fix his church in the US which is a disgrace.
#104 Wow how original!
I guess your not going to send them to schoo either.
Umm… the Pope lives in a small apartment in the Vatican.
I don’t agree with Pope Benedict on immigration, but his house isn’t lavish by any means. It’s in a beautiful building, no doubt, but he only has a few rooms. In the future, if you’re going to take personal swipes at others like that, you might want to be sure that you know what you’re talking about in advance.
Surely I’m not the only one that remembers the old saying:
“Love your neighbor, but build a tall fence”
I did a quick search to see if I could find an original source for the coloquial version, and it was Carl Sandburg:
“Love thy neighbor as yourself; but don’t take down the fence.”
I find it outrageous that bishops who moved around and protected child molester priests, would have the unmitigated gall to suggest that laws should be ignored when it comes to illegal aliens too. out of compassion, no. out of self preservation for the church coffers.
the unholy alliance between the sellout politicians like Bush and McCain and all dems, and the big business interests, and the church interests. they all combine to mean money for them, and misery for American citizens.
talk about taxation without representation. almost no one in all of Wash. stands up for the rights of American citizens to be free from illegal invasion.
Money talks, and sovereignty walks.
The Pope’s living is lavish, so are his cardinals’. Napoleon lived in a “small apartment” too (see the Louvre) but he lived a lavish life. Just look at the cardinals and the Pope himself, their clothes, jewelry. I have been to the Vatican so I do know what I am talking about. That apartment is not as simple as you make it out to be.
We keep tossing around orderly immigration or legal immigration. At what point will someone say it’s enough? Every time it fails to rain in California, Texas or Georgia they worry about running out of water. At what point do we declare our natural resources and their ability to sustain the population we have now is reaching critical overload? It’s great to think we have unlimited money and resources and should welcome the world’s disenchanted, disenfranchised, poor, under educated. After all, tax those that do have the ability to earn more than they need to sustain themselves and give it to those that cannot. Umm, more than one church out there holds that same view, as do our annointed politicians. I’m starting to feel that anyone that “expects or demands” your monetary support can be lumped together as elites.
Well, we once had slavery in this country, we treated Native Americans and Vietnam Veterans poorly, and Bill Clinton molested at least one and possibly several other women while serving in an official capacity, too. So while you’re overreacting, you better not raise your kids in the United States, either.
Pope:
Go home. You’ve overstayed your welcome just like all those illegal invaders you and your henchmen pander to, only to have U.S. pay for them.
Don’t come back.
Pedophile hypocrites.
Check your facts, Chick. None of that stuff belongs to them.
If I borrow my cousin’s BMW and crash on my buddy’s couch inside his big house, it doesn’t make me rich.
You may have been to the Vatican, but I’d bet my left one you haven’t been in the Pope’s house.
Without a doubt, I have a deep respect and affection for the Holy Father. But I am not a Catholic who thinks I have to censor myself from any crticism of him whatsoever (I had a MAJOR problem with JPII, who was a very holy man, kissing the Koran, for example). Benedict XVI is no exception. I live in DC and I watched the Papal Mass on TV. I was appalled at how every other lector, cantor, musicical group, or singer was HISPANIC. At one point the choir even sang a traditional sacred song in Latin….backed by Mexican folk instrumentation. Hideous. And the Holy Father went out of his way to included comments and remarks in Spanish during his entire trip. I wonder, who told him it was okay to do that? Who told the Holy Father that America is a bi-lingual nation?
And most of all, who told the Holy Father that these criminals who have invaded are country are “importing Catholicism”? That is the elite Catholics think. They think Mexicans are importing Catholicism. Sure, 10 million Mexican girls coming over to have babies out of wedlock on our soil…that’s really briging the Gospel to America.
I do have admit that I find it amusing that while the elite Catholics are living a pipe dream of Mexican illegal immigrants re-invigorating America with their Catholicism, it has been reported that 1/3 of all Hispanic immigrants convert to protestant evengelical churches within 10 years of their arrival in America.
See, Holy Father? All that pandering for nothing.
And why aren’t the cardinals and other higher ups in the Catholic church, like MAhoney I believe, who were involved in the sex scandal (by not doing anything about it), why aren’t they being removed from their positions? Instead, they have the nerve to tell us how to run our country just because they want more people in their churches. Maybe the CAtholic church needs to figure out a different way to bring people to their churches.
Kevin in #95 is absolutely correct.
everett_mansfield: That’s real mature. Way to heighten the debate.
As to the Pope’s “lavish” lifestyle – how many of you criticized Obama for attacking business and the wealthy? How many of you argue that wealth should not be punished? So why is it that the office of the Pope – one of the most lofty and sacred offices in the world – cannot have the rich tradition and history behind it?
Is it because you don’t agree with his humanitarian efforts?
Because most of this conversation seems, to me, to be taking the tone that illegal immigrants ultimately aren’t human and deserve to suffer and die for being illegal.
And I’m getting really fed up with the Catholic and Pope bashing in this thread.
“We” did not do any of that, pal.
it was done many centuries ago by SOME people, long ago dead, and I need only point out that the ancestors of those who were mistreated now live better than their ethnic group does anywhere else in the world.
On April 18th, 2008 at 11:32 am, ColtsFan said: #13,
Common now. That link was from Oct. of 2007. Just the other day Mayor Antonio Vi Agra Grossa said that L.A. is as safe today as it was in the 1950’s.
You see, this young man is the Pope’s hero. You can bet your a$$ he’s really praying now….praying that he makes it safely back to Mexico until he can steal another identity. AMEn.
wariscoming – please reconsider and at least have a man of God baptize/bless your child. I’ve often thought the ritual helps the parents more fully realize the awsome responsibility of bringing up a child and solidifies that pledge on your part and your bond with the Almighty. Just a thought
#119 1 nut down 1 to go. The papal residence is quite lavish. He doesn’t live like a franciscan monk. Instead of saying it isn’t why don’t you go look it up and educate yourself.
I may not have been to the actual Pope’s house, but it has been on TV several times and I have seen teh VAtican extensively. If he uses the same or similiar apartmen as the last Pope, it was just on TV when the last Pope passed away,. Again, you should see the apartment NApolean had, much smallr than the Pope’s. For Europe’s small spaces, his apartments are super.
On April 18th, 2008 at 11:34 am, Michelle Malkin said:
MM, what is this “preserve the national identity” concept, of which you speak? You see, I live in a country run by leaders who are contented to allow undocumented nationals to enter our country at will, so I am unfamiliar with the idea of preserving one’s national identity.
englishqueen01 #121, It’s them or us that die (the Illegal invaders that you love). You choose for yourself to be murdered by the illegal invaders. You must live in a remote area in the universe not to see the war that is in our front room, the dining room, the pantry, the kitchen, the basement, the war that is all around us. WAKE UP.
Is there any conservative site left where the Know Nothings are NOT welcome?
EnglishQueen101 loves the illegals and their gangs.
I find it grotesque that an institution that is so heavily involved in Latin America the very area that these people are fleeing is giving us advice. Once Latin America and The US merge there is no America anymore. The fact is my ancestors fled the crown primarily because they were sick and tired of the Prodestant/Catholic fighting. Why do you suppose it was such a milestone when Kennedy was elected President in 1960? There is good reason to be leery of what the Vatican does in my eyes. I’m not anti catholic but it seems to me that if they are good sheppard’s they would focus on the field where their flock toils in crushing poverty, parts of Latin America. Credibility first, advise later.
To Mr. Education the Great (xler8bmw) – the White House is kind of nice also and Air Force 1’s not bad either. Would you like to see our President living in a shack and riding around in a pinto?
Look, the church sex abuses (which haven’t only been perpetrated by Catholics – there are plenty of screwed up clergy elsewhere, too) were awful, and I hope (to my discredit, perhaps) that there is an extra hot place in hell reserved for anyone involved, but you don’t KNOW that Mahoney was PERSONALLY involved. You can’t make that statement and maintain any credibility.
I agree that the Vatican shouldn’t bother to tell us how to run our country, though. I’m at least with you on that, but I’m guessing that they’re Catholic no matter what country they’re in. They’ll fill pews no matter where they are, geographically.
The perfect altar boys for English101 to have over for tea.
#132 not my fault you can’t read context in sentences and take everything you read a face value.
Yeah, and the mud hut I slept in when I lived in Ethiopia was a lot nicer than the other mud huts on my block. I see your point. *SARCASM*
#132 also, your post is anyway related to what?
Benedict said:
Hmmm, perhaps every time I address a Catholic audience, I should briefly run through some of the Catholic Church’s ancient history, too?
Perhaps Benedict could have been a bit more thoughtful towards Americans when he decided upon the name Benedict.
Hmmm, what could this possibly be referring to? Legal immigration? I think not, seeing as we treat them quite well. In fact, we treat the illegal immigrants well, too. What can this possibly refer to other than being soft on enforcing our own borders and sovereignty?
If Benedict is only infallible in regards to doctrinal matters, perhaps he should stick to that when speaking in public.
Given the recent problems of the Catholic Church, I don’t know where he finds the nerve to talk to us about treating people humanely.
The problem with the Catholic Church isn’t that they had a pedophilia problem, any church or organization can have such things, but the very nature of their organization which goes against the plain teaching of Scripture is the source of much of it.
The Apostle Paul plainly said that Bishops must be the husband of one wife, and must “be one who manages his household well, keeping his children under control with all dignity (but if a man does not know how to manage his own household, how will he take care of the church of God?)” 1st Timothy 3:2-5
Jesus taught that a life of celibacy was a “gift” – most people are not able to live lives of celibacy and be content. But Benedict and the Catholic Church expressly forbids Bishops from being married and having families. Jesus had a lot to say about those who use their traditions to contradict the commands of God (Matthew 15:3 and following).
If it wasn’t for the structure of the Catholic Church, the abuse problem almost certainly would have been much smaller.
would you tolerate a stranger sneaking into your house? No, of course not.
then don’t try to tell us that we should tolerate exactly that on a broader scale. because our neighborhoods, our schools, our hospitals, our language, our culture, our entire way of life are under assault from illegal strangers, breaking in like burglars.
I am also against Barak Obalma’s preacher being build a multi-million dollar house with a $10 mill line of credit. I am against any so called man of God who lives too extravagantly on $ from the church, like the TV evangelists who make millions. I find that repugnant personally. I am going to leave a church now because I find they focus too much on money and building a newer better worship place worth millions, that is a turn off from the real purpose of the church. BO’s attacks on the wealthy is an attack on people who for the most part are not so called holy people or spiritual leaders whose $ comes from PARISHONERS.
Didn’t the catholic church this year add to the list of new sins “excessive wealth” or something to that effect? While the merits of what is or isn’t exorbitant can be argued to be relative I think he would get more respect if he lived like Francis of Assisi rather than a Saudi prince who is using his family’s assets to live in relative luxury.
And the fact that you even admit that it is a “lofty” position and arguably call it a sacred one only further proves the point of elitism. Only adding to the rift of what Martin Luther proposed that man only needs a personal relationship with God through the savior Jesus Christ in order to be saved and have eternal salvation. Repentance and Faith. So much easier and biblical than all the other junk the church piled onto it through the false doctrines of works righteousness and indulgences over the centuries. But this argument has also been going on for centuries so I digress that it will not be solved in this thread.
Hi! First time poster here.
I am Catholic. So I will try to defend them a bit. I see no problem with what they are doing in the border since I think what they are doing is out of charity. I am certain they cannot stop the illegals from crossing so since the journey is dangerous, some assistance to at least prevent a loss of life is an act of charity.
I think and hope that the Vatican is not meddling with the politics of the US. I also hope that their comment is not about “filling up the pews.” I do not know their true intentions so I can only pray that what they are doing is just an act of charity.
Now, do not mistaken me as an open border troll here. I think that all this problem will be solved by a wall, a really big, long wall. I also believe that the Vatican should be an advocate of that wall to further protect illegals from their dangerous trek, and also save us some money for other charity.
Its so easy to tell other people to make the sacrifices you want made. Its like me demanding that my neighbor who has a bigger house, and makes more money than me, should let my kids move in and have all the same privileges that his kids get. New clothes, nice bicycle, video games, use of the pool, better food, etc. Since his kids get $10 a week allowance, its only fair that my kids do as well, and then they can send half of it to me.
#132, I said, I believe Mahoney was involved (please read carefully what I had said before jumping the gun), based on news info, where it was claimed, he (I believe it was him) was involved in the scandal by knowing or being awarethat bad stuff was going on, that certain priest or priests were abusers yet he allowed them to be moved from place to place and that priest or priests continued the abuse at the new place. That is my recollection of it and I strongly believe it was MAhoney who was in the middle of that. Again, I said I believe, because it could have been another cardinal, but I think it was MAhoney.
I think to win this battle against illegal immigration, we just need to categorize it the way a Lib would.
Its CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING!
If Americans are the biggest polluters in the world, and our materialistic ways are the cause of all evil. Then why would they want to add more people to the problem. I’m sure when someone comes here from Mexico, or Central America, or any other third-world country, they use far more energy, and cause tons more pollution than if they stayed in their home country.
It’s not my fault that your perceptions cloud your view.
My point was that Catholic’s don’t want the leader of the church living in a shack…just as americans would not want the president living in a shack.
Hexadecimal said (#91):
I thought someone might say this, and I’m grateful that you said it politely. But I think Obama and the Pope and Special Forces are elite in exactly the same way. They all have a gift (Obama got into Harvard, the Pope is thoughtful and a natural spiritual leader, Special Forces are brave and strong). The all worked hard and achieved far beyond what most people would be able to achieve. That’s why what they say carried extra weight.
And if you think Special Forces don’t look down on others, you haven’t spent much time with them.
the problem, Salukidog, is that those greenies are as phony as a 3 dollar bill when it comes to illegal aliens.
groups like the Sierra club have for many years refused to say one word against illegal aliens even though it is, as you say, vastly adding to the problems.
it shows what hypocrites they are. they never say a word about the garbage littered all over the landscape by the illegal crossers, but they throw a fit about a fence.
Just because you believe something doesn’t make it so.
SAMBO NEWS FLASH!
You have now proven you can’t read…..I never said the Pope lived in a shack another poster did and I responded.
Ironic that one of the very few countries in the world that permits open religious affiliation and practice as a constitutional right is chastised for its efforts at self preservation.
All nations regulate immigration, some brutally so. It is in the interest in preserving and improving that nation’s very character and way of life that requires some manner of immigration policy.
There are more than a few passages in the Bible that discuss the separate focus of the Church from the focus of the state. Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.
The founders of our Nation recognized the need to separate church from state. It was imperative so as to allow people of different backgrounds to have the ability to freely practice their own faith. In the event that separation is not maintained, the prospect of the “tyranny of the majority” is all too real. Persecution and outright outlawing of practices based on nothing more than differences in faith. We see a glaring example of that in Africa these days, where the Muslim majority has gone so far as to engage in acts of genocide to rid areas of competing religions.
By treading in the business of the state, the Pope is indeed treading on a very slippery slope. An open borders approach is sure death to any nation, and advocating for such a path for the United States raises the very real prospect of the loss of the World’s biggest champion of freedom and liberty.
Such criticism coming from the leader of the Catholic Church is frankly beyond that leader’s charge. Would the admonishment of the US be different if the immigration issue involved a population that was not 90% Catholic but was 90% Muslim or Jewish? The church has a vested interest in increasing catholic populations, particularly in countries above the average standard of living.
If the Pope was sincere in his message of compassion and forgiveness, he would address an issue that impacts roughly one half of all Catholics in the US: divorced Catholics. That group of Catholics has essentially been damned by the Church for pursuing a remedy that the state, and not the Church, prescribes. I fully understand that the Church’s position on the subject is that marriage is a sacrament, just like the vows of the priesthood. However, the Church several years ago in addressing the issue of pedophile priests issued a statement that those priests could be forgiven for their acts whereas a divorced Catholic could never be forgiven. This incomprehensible position was actually taken by the Vatican itself.
To point out just how skewed this logic is, in the Church’s eyes one can be forgiven for sin involving the breach of one of the Ten Commandments, but not for the church-created “sin” of divorce. Since it is not a sin for a widowed congregant to remarry, one could murder their spouse, confess the sin of murder, remarry and be in good graces in the eyes of the Church. Amazing.
However, since the Church has cast out its divorced members, I suppose it has to find some way of replacing the lost sheep. And at least for the US, having open borders meets its needs most expeditiously.
Somehow, I do not believe that God is ready to cast half of all Catholics in the US into the fire and brimstone. But the Vatican disagrees. It would seem to me that the Pope would be better served in following the parable of the lost sheep rather than seeking to offset the losses in his flock by meddling in domestic issues that clearly are outside the purview of his responsibilities.
Give a man some fish and he can feed his village for a day. Teach a man to fish but send him far away and his village will go hungry. With all of the best men who would provide for their village gone, the dregs that remain will dominate.
when a poor American steals for financial gain, he gets arrested.
but when a poor illegal invader steals someone’s SS# for financial gain, he is given a free pass, a job, and amnesty.
outrageous.
If the Pope and all these open boarders catholics were that concerned with helping the poor, they should sell off their million dollar properties in cities like LA, SF, Chicago, etc. and take the money to Mexico and Latin America. A dollar will go a lot further down there, than it will in LA. That is why I left the church. I was tired of the hypocrisy. They say give, give, give, but then they spend all the money on big cathederals and taking care of their own.
Anyone who’s commented on this site since the first open registration (when I joined) knows I’m hardly a liberal.
The ignorance and downright malice toward me, Catholic teaching, and my views is disheartening to say the least.
I am especially offended by your comments, John Ansell. Borderline libel, in my opinion. Go back and read some of the immigrant threads. Please prove that I “love” illegal immigration.
I had always thought conservatives were much more reasonable and open to debate. Guess not.
Thanks for defending me, all you regulars.
I don’t care if he is the Pope. I don’t like other people coming to MY country and telling me who we can/cannot let come in. Every illegal needs to be deported and yes America can do it! There should be no such thing as immediate citizentry for a child born in this country. When the parents are deported the children are deported too! We need to take our country back. The Pope is here because he’s concerned about the loss of parishioners due to child abuse by the priests and also illegal immigrants and the money they would bring to his church. He’s only concerned about MONEY. Sorry, but that’s how I feel about it.
you tell them queen!
I agree with the Pope…Enforce the border and enforce our laws in the most humane and compassionate way possible!!!!!
You nailed it Rainbow!
Follow the money!!!!
The Sierra Club was bought out for $100 million by some open borders billionaire. Hence their change of tack.
JimM@3:28pm – very well said. Thank you.
Patriot1@3:38pm – a candidate running for election on the premise of making it a federal offense to steal another’s identity, they would win by an overwhelming majority.
as Mark Levin calls them, “Re-pew-bi-cans”
those who pretend to be on the conservative side, but then take sides with the illegal aliens and the liberals in those kinds of issues.
just like Kyl did, when he made lying promises to get re-elected, and then immediately joined with Kennedy and McCain to put together that traitorous amnesty bill in the Senate.
his own campaign volunteers were so outraged at him that they protested in front of his HQ, and quit all support for him.
Applause to them.
Someone should tell the Pope to mind is own business.
I wish I had the ability to know others’ deepest thoughts, hopes, dreams, and intentions just by gazing upon them, as Rainbow, John Ansell, Chick, and others apparently do.
I am anti-illegal immigration as much as anyone here, including MM. I won’t make comments that imply personal omniscience though.
STFU, Pope.
Michelle,a good idea for a new cartoon would be a depiction of the Pope, Pres Bush, Juan McCain, and Geraldo making holes in the new fence through which illegal aliens sneak into the country.
of course, they can go around the fence now, but you get the idea.
LOL English101, I’m border line liberal??? LOL really lol. Why do you say such rubbish? Because I refuse to vote for McInsane over his liberal standing? Is it because I stuck up for Obama because I don’t like dirty politics or guilt by association? Is it because I’m not open to debate if the illegals deserve to steal our things?
Sorry, this heart doesn’t bleed for illegals. Every good little invader you can show me, I’ll show you 10 evil little invaders. Ever seen a fight break out between day laborers over a lawn job? Have you ever been robbed by members of the 18th street gang?
I don’t mind Catholics nor your support of them (my whole family belongs to the religion, even have a couple of relatives that are nuns.)
What I object to your post is your support for the sweet little invaders.
enough with the talking about it. It’s time we do something about it. This “border” line “liberal” is writing in Newt Gingrich.
Well said, patriot1.
Between the Catholic Church’s position that I should be denied the right to own a firearm to protect myself and my family or for any other purpose and it’s position that my government should deny it’s own sovereignty and then confiscate my wealth to redistribute to people who are illegally in my country, I need no longer even delve into my deep theological differences with the Church to remain decidedly not Catholic.
This has got to be the most hate-filled thread I’ve seen in a long time. I’ve always said the only accepted bigotries left are against evangelicals, Mormons, and Catholics…and usually I mean it on the part of leftists/liberals. Unfortunately, as someone who also haunts FreeRepublic, there is a lot of the same bigotry directed against Catholics on conservative sites as well. Whenever the Pope says something (via an AP story) somebody disagrees with, the hate comes out of the woodwork and you all sound like Kos Kids.
Disgraceful.
our foreign policy is none of his business, and our immigration policy is none of his business.
saying in effect that illegals are entitled to sneak in to another country is like saying that Palestinians are entitled to sneak into and take over Israel.
First, my screen name is englishqueen01, not “101”, so get it straight, okay?
Second, I didn’t say you were borderline “liberal”, I said your unfounded and unwarranted comments were borderline LIBEL. Look it up.
Again, I ask you to prove this. Take some time, go back through old immigration posts, and find where I advocate for amnesty, open borders, or anything remotely resembling “support” for illegal immigration.
Indeed, John, enlighten us all.
What I am arguing here is not that the Pope is for open borders. Indeed, that would contradict the Catechism on the subject, but that he’s for treating people humanely. See my comment at #52.
You cannot argue that illegal immigrants deserve to starve or die simply because they are illegal. The money provided for this shelter – to give them food and a place to rest, basic human compassion – was provided by the Vatican, not your tax dollars.
All of you who are arguing that illegal immigrants don’t deserve basic necessities – even if they are breaking the law – should be ashamed of yourselves.
No, it doesn’t. The Church has always recognized the right of an individual or a nation to defend themselves. It’s part of natural law and permissible – even to the point of killing the aggressor. So that’s a lie on its face.
Avoid a case of Nine Dollar Idiocy. Pick up a copy of the Catechism, read it, and dispel some of the erroneous presumptions you have.
I’ll repeat myself – the ignorance and anti-Catholicism pervading these comments is disheartening. I thought so many of you were far more intelligent than that. What a disappointment.
This is the kind of stuff I expect on the DailyKos.
I think the world is badly in need of centers of moral authority such as the Catholic church presumes itself to be. Although I don’t believe ten percent of their poppycock, I would consider signing on with them if they could keep to the spiritual and also cleanup the profound moral depravity that has been shown to infest the priesthood.
But when this ex-Nazi comes into my country and starts advocating on behalf of an invasion which will destroy our culture and prosperity, then I say, your church sucks. Get over it.
Seems to this one-time Catholic that the Pope and the Church have ‘deleted’ those inconvenient, pesky Commandments that forbid ‘coveting’ and ’stealing’ – two things that the illegal alien invaders do every single day that they are in the USA. But this clergy doesn’t have a problem with those sins/crimes as long as the pews are being filled along with their coffers.
The Pope is NOT an ex-Nazi. Joining the Hitler Youth and the Army was compulsory for all men Ratzinger’s age who lived in Germany. His father was rabidly anti-Nazi and Ratzinger himself deserted the army – an action that could have landed him in a concentration camp or before the firing squad – as soon as he could.
So, please, you sound like Bill Maher.
No, they haven’t.
Geez.
Michelle and her moderators really need to clean up this post. This is getting out of hand.
The ignorance and hatred is so glaring, it can probably be seen from the space station.
well said, PJ
Ignatius Reilly, well said. Greenfairie mistakes hate with passion. Conservatives are passionate about riding this country of illegal aliens. The Pope is on a recruiting tour for new customers. That’s fine with me. His agenda is in conflict with Americans. I would be happy to buy a plane ticket for an illegal alien to move into the Vatican. I’d be willing to bet we could get enough Americans to chip in and get all of them out of here.
No disrespect intended, but I wonder how his Holiness would warm up to that?
No, orlandocajun. Accusing the Pope of being an ex-Nazi, in it for the money, etc. isn’t “passion” – it’s hatred. Or bigotry. Or ignorance. Take your pick, but it certainly isn’t “passion”.
The Pope’s “agenda” is passing on Catholic teaching and tradition – neither of which approves of illegal immigration or the like.
Should have figured this would degenerate into a long thread of stupid Catholic Bashing.
MM is a bigot when it comes to this. Proven by her INSULTS sayign that the main reasn for Catholic Church policy is to put more peopel in the pews.
Michelle, you ignorant fool, might it occur to you that this is simply misguided compassion, the kind that values the family, and does nto want to see it suffer due to divisions from political borders?
Note that I do not endorse that view, but neither do I fault it for its source: the compassion of Christianity.
The problem here is that the Catholic Church and the Pope have the right intention, but the wrong method.
MM and others here directly and indirectly accusing the Pope and others of crass lying behavior is simply reflective of your own stupidity and ignorance.
The Pop has been consistent, you have not.
Newsflash – this entire thread is disrespectful.
To His Holiness. To me. And to the Church.
I called Rusty on the carpet for saying he hated the Catholic Church. He apologized and – if I recall – many applauded me pointing that out to him.
Now, suddenly, I’m no better than the liberals. I love illegal immigrants and hate America.
Ordinary Coloradan:
That comment did nothing to heighten the level of the debate.
Concur with Greenfairie. I cringe whenever a Catholic thread gets posted on Hotair.
Nice dogpile going on here too looks like. Bleh.
As a Catholic, I don’t see anything wrong with what was actually said. I didn’t hear the Pope say open the borders, did anyone else?
I read this:
I don’t see what the problem is.
And this was a little surprising from Michelle:
Father Neuhaus, the priest that’s been on EWTN during this coverage was on Dennis Prager’s show awhile back, discussing the Pope’s anti-war stance. He went into how Catholics must adhere to the Catechism, not the opinions of any one Pope, contrary to what many think. Also, he asked everyone to ponder the consequences if the Pope were to be an advocate of the war, or to even remain silent on the war. Being the head of the entire Catholic Church, he is tasked to spread and encourage peace. Being pro-war, or even silent works against his efforts towards peace. And please keep in mind the role of the Pope. He is not the Secretary of Defense for the United States.
Same with illegal immigration. Ponder if he advocates publicly a strong immigration policy. “Build that wall!” Ponder that and check your cynicism at the door when you do. I mean, maybe he should have left the issue alone altogether, but let’s not forget his role, and try not to project our desires onto him.
The Pope speaks ultimately for the least among us. That’s really what’s going on here. That’s his role people, let’s not confuse.
baloney. Mahoney and many others in the church are pushing for illegals all day long 24/7 and organizing protests for them and demanding amnesty for them.
THAT is despicable.
Thank you, Schweggie.
It’s about time some clear-thinking folks started reinforcing my opinion here.
Yeah – guess what – as bishops go, Mahoney’s not a favorite. Those who are pushing for amnesty are wrong.
Please show me where the Pope mentions either amnesty or open borders.
Case closed.
No, thank YOU. Your replies have been lucid and so spot on.
People are reading waaaay too much into this AP article.
I will say that I think there are some priests and Catholics that go overboard on illegal immigration, you know, like John McCain and George Bush? But I don’t see where the Pope has said anything that merits this much animus.
CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT.
Eq01 I got on here late and forced myself to read all of the postings. I must say that I am very disappointed in the crass tone and the insulting behavior of the majority of posters!
I’ll bet that no one has read anything that the Pope has said on his visit except what they saw in the paper. I am amazed that people can comment like this when they don’t know the context of the Pope’s comments. I don’t because I haven’t had the time to read what he actually said.
I am especially disappointed that Michelle has allowed some of these people get away with this childish behavior. After reading this stuff, I need to take a shower!
I certainly hope MM does not feel the need to make this space PC to your standards and I’ve never noticed in the past that she, like you, is too prissy to tolerate some strong expression.
Yes, “hatred” is exactly what I intend to express in this thread. I am angry enough about the invasion of our country that I have left behind my life-long support of the Republican party. If your self-serving pope wants to stick his mouth into our national crisis, he can expect to get dirty.
You think we must speak about him like he is God’s own prince or something? I have exactly the sort of spitting contempt for this dressed-up fraud as I do for the leftist entertainers who don’t know their role. No, that is not fair to the Dixie Chics. They, at least, are sincere and even go against their own economic interests.
This pope dude is just trying to feather the catholic nest. I don’t know why I should not refer to him as a POS just as I would Natalie Maines.
please show me where the Pope tells Mahoney or any other of his church amnesty pushers to back off, and obey Caesar.
no, he is telling them to go full speed ahead with a wink and a nod, without using the word “illegal”
because the legal immigrants to this country have always been treated compassionately, it means that the only thing he COULD be referring to is ILLEGAL ALIENS
This statement doesn’t seem to jive with this one by the press about the pope and the President below:
Our immigration laws are punitive only in that they are written to deport people who break those laws. If that is punitive then so be it. When I swore to defend against enemies foreign and domestic I took that in my mind at least to include any and all would abuse our laws to their own gain.
And I hope you are not lumping me into the ignorant/bigot category for disagreeing with you theologically. I grew up Catholic but have since been saved by Grace alone and not by my works or any works of man least any should boast. (Ephesians 2:8-9)
You have a great blog, and from reading this site for almost a year now before being able to post as of a few days ago you appear to be a solid conservative. God Bless.
if sending someone home is “punitive”, then by all means let’s not punish the Pope by sending him back to the Vatican.
no, he should go to Mexico and tell their gov to stop making it a felony to be an illegal there, and to stop treating the central american immigrants with no compassion.
A joint statement “hinted”……
That is the AP’s interpretation and we all know what that’s like! I don’t take hints, I would prefer the actual statements that were said at the meaning and I’ll interperet them for myself.
By the way griz, your’s was a most respectful post, unlike many others.
I disagree EQ01. The post should stay so that rational people can see them. I now have a better understanding why I am being classified as a bigot for my imagration views. I am not concerned as much about ex nazi’s than I am about future nazi’s.
no, WE are the ones asking for respect, respect for the immigration laws and sovereignty of this country. if you can’t give that respect first, then you get none in return. period.
When the Pope and the upper clergy take a stand against abortion, this is ok. But if the Pope and the upper clergy encourage us to treat illegal immigrants humanely, then this is just a case of a religious leader unjustly interfering with a sovereign nations affairs? This is inconsistent.
Look, legal status and moral status aren’t necessarily connected. The law is, in some cases, clearly not reflective of moral status; e.g., under American law, William Ayers is not a bomber and aborting a fetus is not murder. Under Catholic moral thought the contrary holds. Saying the Pope shouldn’t speak out on immigration because it’s a matter of U.S. law is like saying he shouldn’t speak about abortion. The Pope doesn’t care about U.S. law but about morality. The questions then are “have the immigrants done anything immoral?” and “what is the moral way to treat them?”. in both cases, the law per se is a non-issue. The moral issue for a Catholic is that the human dignity of the immigrant has to be weighed against the U.S.’ legitimate interest in preserving its own national character and laws. So much as possible, both need to be worked for. However, I can’t imagine a Catholic saying that U.S. interest in enforcing its laws outweighs treating an immigrant like a human being.