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
englishqueen01: 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.
I take umbrage at your calling me a liar. I posted my objection to the Church’s position on the matter and stated that I am decidedly not Catholic because of their positions. I attempted to not be insulting to the Church but rather express my disagreement. Being “definitely not Catholic” is not equivalent to being “anti-Catholic”. However, your calling me a liar is over the line.
The Catholic Church, through it’s UN representative back in ‘06 supported the UN’s international gun control which was essentially a ban on our right to carry. The Catholic Bishops Council in both New Zealand and Brazil supported and encouraged gun bans. Various Bishops Councils in the US have supported very restrictive gun control laws including denying concealed carry. As a non-Catholic, when a Catholic Bishops Council says they support gun bans/very restrictive gun control laws/elimination of concealed carry or their representative to the UN supports a gun ban that is the Church’s position, through it’s appointed representatives.
If you say I misunderstand the Church’s position I am happy to listen and be educated on my misinformation. But for you to call me a liar is to me, nearly the greatest insult you could make.
I do not hate the Catholic Church or it’s practitioners. Many of my closest friends are Catholic and while we wholeheartedly disagree on many theological issues, we remain brethren in the Christian faith and agree to disagree. I do not believe in the infallibility of the Pope and therefore am free to disagree with him on any position on any matter be it secular or of faith that I wish.
While I was not intentionally insulting to you, any other practicing Catholic or the Church, I think you were to me.
In spite of the rage that I have expressed here toward Ratzinger, I would like it to be known that I have wanted to like this man and even bought one of his books. I recognize that in many ways he is extremely conservative. Further, it has always been my custom to extend respect to the worlds various religions (except Islam not so much so in recent years). I have never had a general antipathy toward the catholic church although some extraordinary failings of even the modern church are plain for all to see.
But I have chosen today to pour the most venomous contempt on Ratzinger, who, as several posters have pointed out, is not on the record with any strong, direct criticism of USA immigration policy, at least not yet on this trip. What we have instead is winks and nods.
Meanwhile the Catholic Church USA has been up to its armpits in support of the illegal invasion. This has been upsetting me for a long time. So the big boss comes to town and is sly with his remarks. Why is it necessary for this German to make any reference whatsoever to the historical failings of the USA???
Don’t try to make a chump out me, pope. I get it. You run a big extra-national operation with a huge Hispanic constituency and you don’t give hoot for the rights of the American people to preserve their country and their borders. But you are sly enough to let your lackeys carry out your policy and to slickly — à la Obama — avoid a strong direct statement that would bring down the wrath of the people on you.
But I am not playing, pope. I don’t have to wait until I feel the bullet to know who my enemies are. You have my contempt — my spiting contempt — pope, for being an enemy of my nation and my people.
I’m sorry Englishqueen01. Reading too fast. And I apologize for getting your title wrong. I understand your stance on the Pope and I admire your defense of him and the church. So let me make myself clear. I’ve had a personal friend killed by an illegal drunk driver. I’m biased and I admit it. When you write about “feeding and housing” them, I understand your heart is in the right place. But the biased part in me sees such treats as a magnet. That’s all. You see it as helping the poor, I see it as giving them assistance to break the law.
My leaving the Catholic church was not a light decision. Heck, when my nephew’s Catholic High School shut down last year, I was very sad for all those kids. Having gone through Catholic Grade School, High School and College, I’m sure you can understand that I took my time in making that choice.
Again, I am sorry that I wrote your name wrong and misread you Liabel post. And thanks for pointing that out.
Jim M #152,
As usual your post exhibits much clarity and insight.
Wow! Kinda agree with
mostall of your post Ignatius ReillyNewsflash – respect isn’t an entitlement program, just like anybody else the pope has to earn it.
2477 Respect for the reputation of persons forbids every attitude and word likely to cause them unjust injury.278 He becomes guilty:
- of rash judgment who, even tacitly, assumes as true, without sufficient foundation, the moral fault of a neighbor;
- of detraction who, without objectively valid reason, discloses another’s faults and failings to persons who did not know them;279
- of calumny who, by remarks contrary to the truth, harms the reputation of others and gives occasion for false judgments concerning them.
2478 To avoid rash judgment, everyone should be careful to interpret insofar as possible his neighbor’s thoughts, words, and deeds in a favorable way:
Every good Christian ought to be more ready to give a favorable interpretation to another’s statement than to condemn it. But if he cannot do so, let him ask how the other understands it. And if the latter understands it badly, let the former correct him with love. If that does not suffice, let the Christian try all suitable ways to bring the other to a correct interpretation so that he may be saved.280
2479 Detraction and calumny destroy the reputation and honor of one’s neighbor. Honor is the social witness given to human dignity, and everyone enjoys a natural right to the honor of his name and reputation and to respect. Thus, detraction and calumny offend against the virtues of justice and charity.
I agree, but other than the employers and politicians who exploit them, the USA treats illegal aliens with compassion as well. There’s nothing uncompassionate about enforcing our immigration law.
Thank you, rooster.
I have been a little het up all week, because in my community a seven-year-old child was killed by a hit-and-run, drunk, unlicensed, Hispanic man in a stolen vehicle a few days ago. The gentleman’s immigration status has not yet been determined because he gave the police one of several false names that he was known to use. I doubt very much if this POS is in the country legally, although maybe he was just frightened that the police would be mad because he has had four previous DWI incidents. And, no. No one thought to racially profile [sarcasm] him and check his immigration status before now.
At the same time, there was other news in my local media about a similar incident where the victim did not die but was crippled for life. And — believe me — our PC media acts as a branch of the Chamber of Commerce and does not go out of its way to publicize these incidents.
So why didn’t I alert Michelle and Sean and Lou Dobbs, etc? Because, as we all sadly know, this ain’t big news. Happens somewhere everyday.
My community has had a booming economy for some years and many illegals are attracted here to the building trades and other work. As the local television station explained in a special report, drunk driving is a cultural norm in Mexico. I literally take pains to avoid any unnecessary driving because the roads are like the Wild West. And I am angry as hell about it.
Yeah.
What has he ever done to earn any respect? Thats why senator Graham refers to pro border people as bigots…you haven’t earned his respect FloatingRock.
My thoughts exactly! Let the church support them instead of me.
I have no idea, what has he done? I’m not a Catholic. If you respect him, great, but you don’t have the right to impose your respect on others. Or are you saying that you do?
Ignatius Reilly #209, Sorry to hear the sad news. It’s a damn shame that yet another child (or even adults) have to die just because corporations want cheap labor. I’m sick of it too.
How am I imposing my respect on others. It sounds more like you are imposing disrespect respect on others.
For example?
Yes, an example of where/how am I imposing my respect on others.
I wish someone would have told the Pope that the U.S. is welcoming to its immigrants–even the illegal ones who should by no means be welcomed. If he is so concerned about the humanitarian treatment of people, he should go down to Mexico and tell Presidente Calderon to stop the Mexican government from abusing its people so that they don’t have to come here to begin with–and while he’s at it–he should tell them to stop coming here and taking advantage of a far too kindly hand that has been feeding them.
By the way, do you know how hard it is to emigrate to Italy? It’s practically impossible!
Here is what I take away from the Popes speech. He reminded us about America’s history involving the treatment of Native Americans and slavery. We are reminded of this just about daily and it is generally used against us for disingenuously. All (hopefully) of us are against slavery, and even that we didn’t have anything to do with it…we wish it didn’t happen. So (Hint. Hint.) he is reminding us that America will be judged in the future on how we treated immigrants. Thats all.
I am very disheartened at the Pope’s comments. IMHO – I don’t believe his stance is Christ centered. The illegal immigrants come here and work without paying taxes, send this tax free money back to Mexico and then they go and retire back in Mexico… Maybe we should share this passage with him as he must not have read it…
Matthew 22:16-22 (NIV)
16They sent their disciples to him along with the Herodians. “Teacher,” they said, “we know you are a man of integrity and that you teach the way of God in accordance with the truth. You aren’t swayed by men, because you pay no attention to who they are. 17Tell us then, what is your opinion? Is it right to pay taxes to Caesar or not?”
18But Jesus, knowing their evil intent, said, “You hypocrites, why are you trying to trap me? 19Show me the coin used for paying the tax.” They brought him a denarius, 20and he asked them, “Whose portrait is this? And whose inscription?”
21″Caesar’s,” they replied.
Then he said to them, “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.”
22When they heard this, they were amazed. So they left him and went away.
And as long as we are addressing the Pope – why do catholics kiss his hand and bow to him? Jesus would never have allowed that behavior toward him. My bible says:
Exodus 20:3 (NIV)
3 “You shall have no other gods before me.
I will never bow to the Pope or kiss his hand.
I simply commented about how respect has to be earned. Some of the Catholics here seem to feel that, because they respect the pope, it’s incumbent on the rest of us to respect him as well and thus refrain from criticizing him. You responded to me by saying:
BTW, it’s your turn. How have I tried to force my disrespect on others?
My response is based on the idea that respect should be the default…not disrespect. Which is what a lot of people did today (not implying you). People have read way to much into his very few words, and using the AP as a source when the original text is available. What I got out of the speech is above.
For what possible reason would he need to remind us of that? Is he implying that we aren’t treating illegal aliens humanely? Or is he saying that things are acceptable as of now but if we build a wall and implement employment verification and enforcement that it will be comparable to how slaves and Native American’s were treated?
We care more about these poor people than anyone in the rest of the world. That is why many of us have called for change south of the border. We don’t need to change they do, a high tide lifts all boats as Reagan used to say. We would like to permanently fix the problem instead of revisiting it every 10 or 20 years it makes no sense to ignore the root cause.
If during the fascist occupation of WWII Europe a young Ratzinger had shown up at the Vatican after deserting the German army would they have let him in?
For those who don’t remember the past are bound to repeat it? Maybe.Yes.
I don’t think so. From his other speeches he sounds more pro american than half of Americans.
I sure don’t get that out of what he said.
I agree with that in regard to personal relations. Absent any indication to the contrary people should treat others with respect, however in this case the majority of the people here seem to feel that the Catholic Church’s advocacy of illegal immigration combined with the popes comments on the subject are sufficient cause not to respect him.
Englishqueen01,
I’m not sure if I qualify as a “regular” (post #156), but I just want to say that though I am not a Catholic, I am saddened by some of the comments that I have seen on this thread.
I have disagreed with you sometimes on some issues, but I think we agree that it should be possible for people to voice their disagreement without crossing over into disrespect. I agree with your point that it does not raise the level of the discussion.
About 4-5 months ago I had a long talk with one of the priests at my parish about this subject. What he said was that we’re to treat all immigrants (legal & illegal) with charity and kindness. The church will help an illegal stay in the country but will work with the system to do it. We have no obligation to help them stay here illegally.
He likened it to the Sacrament of Confession. A priest will not grant absolution if the penitent intends to continue the sin.
I am 100% against illegal immigration. That doesn’t mean I have no compassion.
“The priests resumed their previous duties with children only when the bishop was advised by the treating psychologists or psychiatrists that it was safe for them to resume their duties…In response to questions, defenders of the Church’s actions have suggested that in re-assigning priests after treatment, Bishops were acting on the best medical advice then available.”
An internal church report revealed between 85 & 90% of all cases involved homosexual molestation of adolescents, not prepubescent children. In other words it was gay priests having sex with pre-teens and teenagers. I do not defend either act. Deviants in the clergy are a cancer of evil. The report was not supposed to go public but it leaked and was very quickly buried. I used to have a .pdf copy of it but that computer died about a year ago.
The Arlington diocese is the only one in the US that ordains more priests than we need. Father James Gould took over the vocations program and by sticking to the conservative principles of the church turned around the dearth in a short time. I’ve met him and can only say he is a great man and a truly humble servant of God.
Anyone forget the Pope John Paul II was a key element of Reagan’s plan to destabilize the Soviet Union? JP II’s huge support of the Solidarity movement in Poland was one of the least reported aspects of the whole thing.
Right here. The guiding principle of the Fourth Degree of the Knight of Columbus is Patriotism.
See Pope JP II and Poland. Still think they shouldn’t COMMENT on treating people humanely?
A sentiment echoed by the Politburo and Kremlin back in the ‘80s.
So now if you try to defend the pope, even while disagreeing with what he said (as I do) then you WANT to be murdered by an illegal alien?
That’s why you never hear about other priest molesting children.
Oh wait, they do. This is from a study of the news reports of abuse. Two reasons there are more Catholic priests listed. Catholic abuses received more press and clergy who molested their own children were far less likely to be labeled by their profession.
Religious leaders were grouped into Roman Catholic priests, non-Catholic Christian clergy, and non-Christian clergy. There were 116 Catholic perpetrators: 95 who engaged in homosexuality and who violated 229 children; 17 who engaged in heterosexuality and who raped 24 girls; and 4 who engaged in sex with at least 4 children of unspecified sex.
There were 61 non-Catholic Christian clergy who molested the underage. In addition, 4 Rabbis homosexually raped 10 children, 2 Rabbis heterosexually raped 2 girls, a Mormon pastor who engaged in homosexuality violated 3 boys, 3 Mormons heterosexually raped 10 girls, and a (male) Buddhist monk raped a boy.
Sorry I was late to the fight.
You two beat me to it. I love this site but the obvious hatred of Catholics; even by Michelle herself is like watching an intelligent and compassionate friend go off on a drunken tirade.
Answer
Also, the Pope is not God as you seemed to suggest there. Bowing and kissing the ring is completely optional. It’s a display of respect. Nothing more, nothing less.
Yep, and that’s the exact dichotomy the Pope has to reconcile also. I don’t envy the tightrope the Pope has to walk. Personally, I am an border control hawk. I’m for the deportation of illegal aliens. Speaking of which, any updates on deporthemnow.com, Michelle?
That’s a nice way to say it.
Er, wasn’t the whole Poland thing a result of illegal invaders? I fully respect John Paul II but he was protesting the occupation of that country.
Obviously…and since you don’t respect him because you disagree with him it makes perfect since to disrespect him. Kinda reminds me of the people that don’t agree with the minuteman dude when he was to speak at Columbia U.
From the Catechism of the Catholic Church:
Scandalous!
It’s disingenuous to equate disrespect or even hatred for the pope and the policies of the Catholic Church with hatred of Catholics themselves. I’m an independent conservative because I don’t like either the Democrat or Republican Parties, does that mean I everybody? No.
I don’t like either the Democrat or Republican Parties, does that mean I [hate] everybody? No.
I think I will go with Jesus Christ and the US Constitution. The catechism would work well in a communist nation if you want to emigrate here you are not our collective guest we are not your collective host. Back when we had a successful country we had rules if you were sick you couldn’t come, if you were a one legged ditch digger you couldn’t come. If you didn’t have a, and I say A host here, you couldn’t come. We once followed the rules and we prospered, now we don’t and aren’t, how far down do we want to go? Or maybe we start following the rules that got us where we were.
First of all I didn’t “dis”respect the pope, however I don’t respect him because he and his organization doesn’t respect the sovereignty of the nation I love.
If it makes you feel any better I don’t respect La Raza either.
Everything is a matter of perspective. I’m not trying to assert any equivalence between them, but during the Cold War many American communists felt that the Soviet Union was the good guy and Benedict Arnold was probably highly thought of in England.
To suggest that there is no difference between anti-American sentiment at an American university and the patriot who was the target is nihilism.
Look on the bright side.
Debbie Schlussel hasn’t (yet) stated that is evidence of the Pope’s anti-Semitism.
So if I understand your point; Reagan also fought against communism in the satelite nations purely as an matter of illegal immigration?
It was a recognition by Pope John Paul II that communism is evil and he joined with Reagan and Thatcher to combat it.
I’ve read your stuff before tgusa so it pains me to see you use a pitiful strawman argument rather than actually debate or concede the point.
Can anyone name a predominately catholic nation that takes in millions of illegal immigrants yearly? The Pope should wonder why his flock leave catholic nations and have to travel to mainly protestant ones to achieve ecnomic prosperity.
Actually KaosKlerik I was only pointing out that it was a bad analogy, nothing more.
So why do you hate Catholics?
Which analogy do you consider bad?
We were talking about the Pope going to Poland to protest what? What was going on in Poland? Who was occupying Poland? Surely you don’t think the puppet regime installed by the Kremlin was pulling the strings? Now if he had gone to the Kremlin that would have been a fitting analogy. No?
I remember when I as a Catholic came to my own personal cross-roads with this nonsense. I was working for the Arch-Diocese of Atlanta in my sophmore year of college I was happy to help the homeless and the elderly, but when some of the staff from the office of home missions started talking about illegal immigrants and “racist” minutemen I started asking my fellow volunteers some tough questions. After a while I just stopped working there all together and I refused to help the Office in any aspect and began speaking out against the practice. Needless to say I was told point blank by a clegyman on staff at the school that it is the right of Mexicans to take back the portions of the country they lost and anyone who stands in their way is not only wrong but, and I quote “Among those who stood against civil rights in the 1950’s” I have found that there are many Catholics that believe differently but, when the Pope says something like this it is just more ammo for the Soft Headed Catholics who believe and I quote “they are governed by a higher power, fool!”
full article:
link to Fr Jonathon’s article
http://www.azcentral.com/news/articles/2008/04/16/20080416pope-migrants0416.html
I would venture to say that the Church is doing much more than merely preaching compassion toward legal immigrants.
I apologize, Mike, that I am teasing out just a tiny portion of your excellent post as a focus for the moment and neglecting the role of the church, which is really the topic of this tread.
But that bluntly stated claim of Mexicans to “take back” this land really resonates with me, because this week I heard the same outrageous point made publicly and just as nakedly as you put it.
I heard it from a Hispanic caller to a local talk-radio show hosted by a fellow who is very conservative and generally pretty indignant about the illegal situation. But the host was weary and beaten down…he was whining at the beginning of the show about having to discuss this again (for which he should be fired, IMO).
A young man — Fernando — called and was polite and somewhat soft-spoken, which seemed to completely disarm our tired host. But although Fernando’s voice was soft, his words were unbelievable. He said that white people had been running things too long, and that this is stolen land anyway. (I, also, am in the South**EAST**.) And, he said that in about ten years Mexican people will have taken it back. He said this with obvious satisfaction that a just order will be restored.
What really knocked me out about this is that the host did not challenge him at all. He didn’t ignore him. He just acted like this was a fairly normal thing for a caller to say, not something that he agreed with but nothing that made him angry. This is a big station and the station that carries Rush.
Part of it is that the host — although very conservative — is not extremely bright and tends to react to people’s tone of voice but not really hear what they say, at times. And he was tired. But when anti-white racism and the declaration that the reconquista is justified and well underway can be made on one of Rush’s 50kw stations and go unchallenged…well, we’ve come a long way baby. I am just so sick about it.
You’re right tgusa. He should have kept his mouth shut since he wasn’t backing a labor movement in Moscow.
You win.
let’s see now. If I sell my house, and then many years later I want it back because the new owners have greatly improved it, I have the right to just sneak onto the property, squat there until enough like-minded friends also show up to overwhelm them, until they surrender and give me back my old property which I don’t own or have any right to.
yeah, makes perfect sense to the church amnesty pushers. but not to anyone else with an ounce of common sense.
It’s a sad day when a Catholic filters her faith through her politics.
Congratulations, Michelle. Now you have TWO venues where the Church is openly vilified. You are a beacon of Catholicity.
Look you don’t need to post history lessons for me as I actually saw it all happening. What is your point besides thinking we all hate Catholics which is plain wrong? Do we hate all Americans because we don’t like some of our Presidents policies, no. Learn to handle criticism no ones perfect.
As one who was born and raised Catholic, I disagree with many of the participants here concerning the perceived hatred of Catholics and the Catholic religion. The Church is indeed deserving of much of the criticism that has been leveled here, and if we ignore the views and perceptions of others, there is never going to be a change in the direction of the Church or its practices.
In a large sense, the entire abuse scandal was fueled by the reluctance of people to speak out about the problem in the first place. we now know that knowledge of the issues were widespread within the Church itself for many, many years. The solution was to cover it up, buy the silence of the injured parties and move the offending priests around to other parishes like pieces on a checkerboard. And the cycle continued.
It was not until a few people refused to be silenced and demanded the open airing of their grievances in a court of law. Initially, the Church’s defense lawyers maligned and discredited the plaintiffs. That practice continued until the issues received more and more public scrutiny, and more and more victims followed suit.
Personally, I found such conduct revolting, and found the attempts to cover up the scandal abominable. Using a position of faith and trust to satisfy one’s prurient desires for pedophilia is as despicable as it gets. The very men entrusted on this Earth to guide us morally and deliver us from evil were among the worst perpetrators of the worst kind of evil. Knowing of such conduct and implicitly condoning it through inaction and active concealment is even more vile.
I commend Pope Benedict for issuing an apology on behalf of the Church. It has been a long time coming. But that remorse in no way excuses the conduct and actions of those Bishops, Archbishops and Cardinals who had knowledge of these events. To my knowledge, none of these men has been excommunicated or otherwise punished for their breach of faith, trust and criminal conduct. And also, to my knowledge, none of the perpetrators of these vile acts has received sanction by the Church (although they have been prosecuted under US laws). And therein lies one of the major problems regarding the perceptions and views of both Catholics-and non Catholics. To fail to put actions with words makes those words appear disingenuous.
The other issue at play here is something many Catholics forget. The Pope is the leader of a large religious denomination, but he is also a head of state. Vatican City is a sovereign state that maintains diplomatic relations with other countries on par with those countries. While Church doctrine include the notion that the Pope’s decisions are infallible, being those of God’s representative in this world, the doctrine only applies to spiritual matters and does not extend beyond that realm. relations with other nations is clearly a matter of a secular, not religious, nature.
I would ask whether people who expressed dismay at the Mexican President’s recent visit to the US in which he railed against those opposed to illegal immigration, found a difference in the Pope’s lighter version of the same message. To non-Catholics, and to Catholics who believe as I do, there is no difference. It is one thing to preach peace and compassion, but quite another thing to take a position regarding a nation’s exercise of its rightful sovereign powers and duties to its citizens.
Finally, a head of state who criticizes the policies of another when his own house is not in proper order comes off as a hypocrite to the general public. This Country is not perfect, and has never claimed to be. And we do eventually pay dearly for our mistakes. Slavery was an inhuman practice that existed for about 90 years in the US (not 400 years). Even though only 8% of all families in the US owned slaves (per the 1860 census), we went to war. No other nation on Earth fought a Civil War on the issue of slavery. Over 600,000 soldiers on both sides died, and the infrastructure of the nation, particularly in the South, was torn to shreds. Like I said, we have a history of paying a heavy price for our mistakes.
The Church does not has a pristine past when it comes to being on the wrong side of the issues. From the practices of the Spanish Inquisition, the monetary scandals of historic and recent vintage (I.e., the Vatican Bank), to the more recent problems with pedophile Priests, the Church, at least from the perspective of its status as a sovereign power, is not exactly free from sin. As the saying goes, people who live in glass houses….
We can be indignant and offended by the critical comments we see and hear, or we can take them to heart and strive to understand their basis. It is only when we listen that we can hope to address those concerns and issues.
Or we can try to understand what the Pope is saying, and it’s nothing like what you and others are claiming he’s saying. But forget about actually thinking about the words he says. Cafeteria Catholics walk down both sides of the buffet.
An open letter to Pope:
We in America have enough problems without you, meddling in the affairs of our nation. Did no one tell you we have no established religion in this country? You’re a good reason why.
We don’t need you or Mahoney telling us how to run our immigration policy.
You can leave any time now pope. You’re not my “holy father”.
He’ll be leaving on Sunday and you can go back to thinking about your true religion without him making you uncomfortable in your delusion of piety and conservatism.
seek to divide us. I have seen it happen time and again especially when religion is part of the discussion, we have many enemies. It’s an old commie trick infiltrate pretending you are part of the group and then start something that makes the group look bad. I’m not referring to legitimate gripes you know what kinds I am talking about.
Opps sorry,
Excellent big Jim M. Lets not forget that in all of this there are those that post here that seek to divide us. I have seen it happen time and again especially when religion is part of the discussion. It’s an old commie trick infiltrate pretending you are part of the group and then start something that makes the group look bad. I’m not referring to legitimate gripes you know what kinds I am talking about.
as long as the recons are going back into ancient history, why don’t they go further back, to before the Spaniards invaded, when there was no spanish spoken in the land down south, and there was no Catholic church. just “Indians”
by that reasoning, we should press 2 to speak aztec, and when you make sacrifices for your family, they mean the real thing
Pope to U.S.:
Embrace illegals here (so I don’t have to), because my church is drying up.
It’s an old Nazi trick.
From the WSJ:
I appreciate your points, Kaos. If you couldn’t tell, most of my favorite Catholic leaders have been those who understand and appreciate America’s positive role in the world since her inception. Catholics who have had “road to Damascus” experiences, and converts, have been some of my favorite defenders of the faith (they seem to apreciate it more.)
Pointy-headed (for lack of a better word) academics who over-scrutinize and suffer over “just war” principles and “peace and justice” issues have been some of my least favorite Catholic apologists.
Give me a Catholic leader who loves God AND Country any day.
And yes, I still bristle over ANY European who knocks American foreign policy when they can’t suggest anything better or realistic.
I don’t care if it’s Cardinal Mahoney or Rev. Wright. I don’t want to hear anti-American rants on Sunday at church.
And I certainly don’t want them having political influence to tear down American society with phony grievance activism.
Re: Jim M #253
Thank you for your wise and eloquent commentary above. It is remarkable to find such a thoughtful and polished short essay tacked up here in the midst of such an ugly brawl.
Your comments make me want to reach for my better self and say again that my angry words were really not stimulated by any ongoing anti-Catholic feeling at all. I am just very angry about the illegal immigration situation and, therefore, angry at the Catholic Church just now, for its role in all of this. And the arrival of the Holy Father brings all this feeling to a somewhat climactic moment. I don’t expect anything positive from the president of Mexico. It is because the Pope is a man of such moral authority that disappointment in him can turn so quickly bitter.
I will not pretend that I am suddenly no longer angry at the Church, but it is an anger that arrived lately and can pass away again. I have been deliberately offensive in this thread and am not proud of myself, although I am not quite able to say yet that I want to take it back. I just offer this to all the Catholics here: I don’t hate your church or the Pope and certainly not you. I am just furious at the Church’s meddling in all of this.
#258 everett mansfield said:
I wonder if you would still have posted that if you knew that Pope Benedict’s 14 year old cousin was taken away and exterminated in 1941 by the Nazi Party because he had Down’s Syndrome?
What next, Elie Wiesel was a brownshirt?
I’d be wary of that kind of thinking, tgusa. Years of constant searching for “infiltrators” is one of the chief sicknesses that ruined FreeRepublic.
In fact, I think the point of Jim M’s post was precisely a caution against going into a defensive posture.
I am sorry that I had to send a message with so much anger today. But I, for one, am certainly not trying to pull that old commie trick on you.
If you think all of the comments posted above are just “critism”, then there isn’t any point is discussing this further.
No I’m not on a witch hunt Ignatius Reilly but I appreciate the warning. I am a proponent of free speech I don’t want any censorship self or otherwise I want it all out in the open. I have even challenged those who want jihadist videos censored I believe we need to know all the facts as they are. Know your enemy and never underestimate them. If you thought I was referring to you rest assured I wasn’t.
Specifics.
I think the pope has been living in Europe too long..he is starting to sound like ingrates we protect.
Your Holiness, Why do you yourself not obey Jesus’s words of “…Render to Caesar that which is Caesar’s but render to God that which is God’s?”
The Catholic Church like many other churches suffer from the inertia of being too big for their own good…where POLITICS begins to outshine teachings…I see this all too often with both protestant and catholic churches as of late.
(The protestants really suffer from creeping feminism too-and no I am not agnostic nor atheist)
I’ve read (and listened) to what the Holy Father has said regarding immigration during his visit here, and I’ve yet to discover what all this hand-wringing by Michelle and her cronies is all about. In his address to the American Bishops, the Pope encourages them to care for the immigrant in their midst. He doesn’t encourage the immigrant to break the laws of the land, he doesn’t even intimate that that these are the immigrants of whom he’s speaking. However, *if* it were . . . so what? If someone is here illegally and wants to remain here - the Catholic Church is not the law enforcement agency of the United States. It is, however, supposed to care for those in need. Providing spiritual and physical (as well as legal) support does nothing to undermine already deficient and poorly enforced laws. It is reaching out to those whom Christ told us to reach out to. He will not commend those who reach out to the prisoners who weren’t really guilty, after all.
If a devout Catholic believes that the pope is truly infallible then any criticism of him is necessarily invalid. Perhaps this explains why some Catholics here prefer to think the sentiments expressed in this thread result from an anti-Catholic bias in general rather than an honest disagreement with the pope and the policies of his Church as it affects the sovereignty of America. The pope can’t possibly be wrong so everybody else must be filled with hatred.
I’m not saying I’m right, not in every case, but the thought occurred to me so I thought I’d mention it and give them the opportunity to explain how much I must hate Catholics like my only brother.
I’ll say this in their favor though, they haven’t condemned anybody to “the lake of fire” yet like some of the Huckatopians over at Hot Air have.
That’s bull. A devout Catholic doesn’t think the Pope is infallible. We believe that ex cathedra definitions (which have to be made by the Pope) are infallible.
Learn. Think. Then Speak.
Michelle, thank you so much for this post.
I have been concerned about our sovereignty and security of our country for a long time and have tremendous respect for all you have done to tell the truth about all that has been happening about the illegal immigration. Thanks again!!!
Let’s think about it though…He is the Pope. Is there anyone here that is actually surprised that he would be saying such things? Same as his views about the War in Iraq. Is there someone here that is surprised that the Vicar of Christ, St. Peter’s successor has a public policy of peace and non-violence?
What would it say if the Pope, the leader of the catholic Church, and the other stuff he is, came out in SUPPORT of war? What would it mean if the modern day Pope of the Catholic Church were to come out AGAINST people coming to this, or any country, claiming to be escaping poverty, oppression and all the other bizz words that Liberals and others use to tug at people’s heart strings? I think THAT would be a MUCH bigger shock.
The Catholic Church has official stances on things that do not hold up to Political Correctness or anything else having to do with the blowing of the wind or people’s personal opinions. It has been around for 2000 years. Just like when Pope John Paul II died and the Cardinals were in the selection process to decide the new Pope and every MSM talking head out there were claiming that it was in the best interest of the Catholic Church to pick a Black Pope, as there had not been one and it would only be fair…would show that the Church was down with Affirmative Action…forget whether or not there was a Cardinal fit enough to be pope that happened to be Black…or they were declaring that since there was such a large Hispanic population of Catholics, that they should pick a Hispanic Pope…they showed that the Holy Mother Church does not play such games.
They are not about to now. They are not about to bend to the pressures of the Gay and Lesbian thugs who carry out a very intollerant campaign against the Church because of their views on Homosexuality…claiming tht catholocism should bow to modern trends instead of what the Boble and 2000 years of Church Dogma has to say, or the Feminists, or any other Special interest Group in this country who actively campaigns against Roman catholocism as a way to blackmail it into bending to their whims…the Church is going to continue with their views on poverty and such, thus the Pope will maintain the same views that the Church has always had…that the rich and well off should do all in their power to help those that are weaker and poorer than them…including countries.
fortunately, we, as Catholics, still are allowed to disagree with these things, and often do.
Sorry Your Holiness…but they need to get here LEGALLY. We have no issue with helping…just an issue with the methods in which they arrive.
Here’s the thing: when the Church herself is threatened, measures may be taken.
I think what the Pope is saying is that it’s okay to enforce the borders, but to have compassion for those in need.
Honestly, it seems like all the people who get deported are ones with families, while the crooks get to stay so liberals can lay claim to “tolerance.” As we all know, strong, traditional families threaten much for which they stand for.
Et tu, Michelle? I am crushed!
Please say it isn’t so and sign the petition!
tizzidale,
You are off the mark on this one. Barrack Obama doesn’t actually come out and say what he really means on many of his policy stands. This is exactly what the Pope has done with his immigration comments.
Sorry, the Pope was meddling in our national crisis with typical Barrackese lingo.
Rooster, you may be right but you may be wrong. I sure do hope you are perfectly understood when you make statements in a foreign language.
DannoJyd,
Ich verstehe die deutsche volk gut.
Auslander in europa muss alles in ordnung machen vor das recht zu leben in ein lande das liegt im der europa union.
Ich verstehe enlglisch besser als deutsch, aber ich verstehe ich nicht was der Barrack meint wenn der macht sein schnautze auf.
This above means, I understand english better than german and I still don’t know what Barrack is saying when he opens his yap.
I agree. I’m a conservative Catholic, and I thought Pope Benedict’s behavior in our country–to criticize the most welcoming country on earth for wanting to have a sane immigration policy–had a lot of nerve. Then they donate money to help illegals get into our country?!
Then to go the U.N. on our soil and complain about our foreign policy and want more “multilateralism,” i.e. lament the loss of the Soviet Union to counter the U.S.A.
This was the last straw. According to Debbie Schlussel, the Vatican has been supporting communism in Cuba, sent the Secretariat of State Cardinal Bertone there in February, and he just recently stated there was no oppression of Catholics. These people in the Vatican are completely out of reality in their love of socialism, which the Church before the “spirit of Vatican II” consistently has opposed.
Sorry, but Pope Benedict has acted like a complete jerk while in our country. (I’m obedient on religious matters, but on political when they are wrong, no way.) He needs to get on the airplane and get the hell out of America.
Kaos ,, I am sorry I am not anti catholic at all. It just seems that most nations that are predominately catholic such as Latin America are poorer then other nations. If I offended anyone I apologize. If Mexico does take over the southwest, I hope it can run it better then the thirty two states it presently has. Would the southwest be as poor as Mexico if that happen?
I’m not certain if you are a master of irrelevance or you just have a difficult time understanding American English. What is certain is that you totally missed my earlier point. As a matter of fact, it appears that by doing so you just proved my point, so don’t be a dope get off of my Pope!
Danno,
I have no problem with the Pope. I applied for residency in Germany almost 10 years ago. I know first hand what it takes to be allowed to live in a country and have the right to work in that country.
Had the Pope said something like; look to our vays of velcoming immigrants(auslander) and emulate our vays.
The first step is to verify your existence in that country by reporting to the police and city hall. If you do everything asked and are accepted you will sign a statement (with penalty of deportation to country of origin for non-compliance) with your sponsor that you will not be a financial burden on the state.
If the Pope would have said something like this, I am sure millions of Americans would have been cheering, not jeering the Pope.
John:
I accept your apology, and I am sorry to hear about the loss of your friend. I don’t disagree that illegals should be deported. Never have.
I have an obligation to respect the Pope and defend him from such unwarranted, ignorant attacks.
The problem here is that every single one of the people that have commented, and repeated, claims that I - or others familiar with Church teaching - have refuted (and accurately so), is engaging in ignorance on a grand scale.
You do not have to agree with the Pope, but you have an obligation to intellectual integrity - which means you need to read and understand everything the Pope’s comments touched upon rather than honing in on one comment and using it to bash the office.
Those who know me know I rarely play the “I’m offended” card. But when I sit here and read all the absolute bulls*** being spouted off, especially when I try to dispel and explain things and am basically given the finger, I think being offended is justified - don’t you?
Michelle should give space to someone who fully understands Church teaching in order to explain these things. It’s disappointing she’s let this thread unravel this far without offering that opportunity.
Far lighter criticisms have been considered hateful and haven’t there been posts about the ignorance of folks on the DailyKos - who pretty much write in the same manner as 80% of the posts above?
I find it rather ironic and hypocritical that the same people who’d normally read an AP article and spend hours looking for sources to refute some of the claims made take something about the Pope on its face.
You all should know better. On matters of abortion, homosexuality, and other traditional Catholic teaching, the Pope is ignored by the MSM, or his words skewed to make him look like a bigot. Barbara Boxer held up a resolution on the House floor welcoming him to the US because she didn’t like that the resolution included language saying the Pope “respects every human life” - cuts a little too close to the quick for her, I guess.
Calling the Pope a “Nazi” after it’s been shown (and a quick Google search would prove) he deserted and his family fought against the Nazis - at great personal risk - is born out of hatred and malice. If certain commenters cannot get it through their skulls that he isn’t, never was, and never will be, a Nazi - it ceases to be shear ignorance of fact and becomes something much worse.
Once again, I repeat - the Pope and each individual Cardinal/Bishop has his own opinions on matters. Some are liberal