Special Report
The Catholic Case for Immigration Reform
The U.S. bishops’ call for a “humane and comprehensive solution” is the correct one, Mr. Tancredo.
Servant of God, Bishop Fulton Sheen, once said, “There are not more than 100 people in the world who truly hate the Catholic Church, but there are millions who hate what they perceive to be the Catholic Church.” Sadly, Bishop Sheen’s statement applies not only to those outside the Church, but to millions who are baptized Catholics. A case in point is the response to an initiative by the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops calling for a “humane and comprehensive solution to the problems which beset our immigration system.”
Go to any website and read the comments which follow postings of stories like the above. The misunderstanding of the Church’s motives has spewed such hatred, that some sane folks seem to have lost their powers of reasoning. Consider this from fallen-away Catholic, Tom Tancredo: “I suspect the pope’s immigration comments may have less to do with spreading the gospel than they do about recruiting new members of the church,” Tancredo said. “This isn’t preaching; it is faith-based marketing.”
The notion that the only reason the Church is in favor of immigration reform is to enrich her own coffers would be laughable were it not so sad. If you are, as am I, a member of a parish where there are lots of poor immigrants, you know that it is the Church that aids them, and not the other way around. However, it matters not to faithful Catholics whether or not these folks can contribute financially; they know that the whole Body of Christ is enriched by their worship.
Those who are Catholics should remember the Lord’s command to St. Peter to feed his sheep and tend his lambs. Do you really think the race or nationality of the sheep matters to the Church? If you do, then you’d better do some research into the millions of poor and sick around the world who are tended by her. Indeed, go to the Mother House of Blessed Teresa of Calcutta and you will everywhere see the words, “As you did it to one of the least of my brethren, you did it to me.”
Is the Church’s record in worldly affairs perfect? Hardly. Throughout her history, many representatives of the Church have erred gravely; a common saying purports that the road to Hell is paved with bishops’ skulls. And although the Church’s main concern is for the immigrants that are already here, they agree that it’s a good idea to tighten laws that will prevent further illegal immigration and protect our sovereignty.
Yet it’s also true that too many people merely look at this question in terms of legality and ignore the dictates of Christianity as it pertains to heavenly affairs. They cite our Savior’s injunction to render unto Caesar that which is Caesar’s. Yet many Christians agree that if a law or practice is immoral — such as forcing doctors to perform abortions — they will defy that law. But when it comes to immigration, this moral imperative doesn’t seem to apply.
Consider that under the 2006 Republican bill that failed to pass, priests and religious would have faced mandatory five-year prison sentences simply for giving aid and comfort to members of their flocks who were here illegally. If you can find a priest who would ask for a green card before giving food or shelter to someone in need, then he’s in the wrong line of work. Again, at the basis of her desire for immigration reform, the Church seeks humane treatment for all peoples, regardless of their national origin. Don’t forget that the parable of the Good Samaritan was given in answer to the question: who is my neighbor?
And make no mistake about it; a great many illegal immigrants are suffering exploitation by various groups, when their greatest sin is an overwhelming desire for a better way of life for themselves and their families. We should take care lest we, like the Pharisees, be lectured by our Savior for blindly following the letter of the law: “If you only knew the meaning of the words; ‘I desire mercy and not sacrifice’ you would not have condemned the innocent.” (Matthew 12:7)
All of this is not to say that the USCCB or their stance on immigration is perfect. Sadly, some of the more liberal bishops have spent more time catering to the whims of this world than on the teaching of the Church’s Magisterium. But if Catholics wish to vent their frustration at the Church in America, let them do so by praying that those bishops look into their hearts and return to more Christ-centered forms of worship in their dioceses, but let them also look into their own…for charity.
rssg| 1.13.10 @ 6:25AM
Nonsense, Tancredo is essentially correct. It is not the "mission" of the USA to accept everyone in the world who wants to come here. The USA does not exist merely as a place for others to "migrate" to.
The Founding Fathers did not declare independence and liberty, then proclaim - "Everyone in the world should move here!". We are NOT a nation of immigrants, nor are is everyone an immigrant. Both are historically incorrect.
The USA needs a reduction in legal immigration and enforcement (deportation) of illegal aliens. That simple.
Polly| 1.13.10 @ 9:59AM
Excellent commentary. I agree 100% with you and Tom Tancredo.
Polly| 1.13.10 @ 10:02AM
To clarify, I was replying to RSSG comment.
Alan Brooks| 1.13.10 @ 11:28AM
"We have no obligation to the criminals of the third world [...]"
Mike got it just so.
DaveS| 1.13.10 @ 7:39PM
Tancredo has it right. The trouble with the bishops and the pope is they start talking like they are speaking authoritatively when they have little business opening their mouths; they may as well make pronouncements on food channel controversies. Immigration is an issue that is based in charity - not coercion. And for Benedict XVI, the collapse of Copehagen is deliciously associated with one of the worst cold spells in Europe in decades. God has spoken; let's listen.
Immigration, to bishops in L.A. and elsehwere, is about the collection plate. An health care? Wait to you see what's in the bulletin inserts and in the Prayer of the Faithful this weekend: my stomach is already turning.
Quartermaster| 1.13.10 @ 8:12PM
Hear, Hear! rssg gets it right, as does Tancredo. Fabrizio's article is mostly strawmen.
Actually, Sheen got it wrong too. The truth has been known about the Roman Catholic Church for a very long time. I don't hate it, I just have no respect for it as a Christian organization as it claims to be. The vapidity of its toleration of liberation theology (it refuses to deal with those who espouse it), and humane reform, which is nothing more than maintaining its numbers (sorry Lisa, that's all that's maintaining it in a lot of places) is the sort of thing that should get its clergy jailed. The hierarchy is doing nothing but advocating breaking of reasonable laws.
G| 1.13.10 @ 10:45PM
"We are NOT a nation of immigrants, nor are is everyone an immigrant. Both are historically incorrect. "
Choctaw, British, Iroquois, French, Sioux, Cherokee, Scottish, Dakota, German, etc.....
HELLO??? Big Rock, funny looking people, does the date 1620 ring a bell?
HELLO?? Big woman, stone tablet, give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses those yourning to be free? Island? Ellis? Big building?
Your first point is well received, your second point was just not thought out. Religious persecution is the first and foremost reason why people came to this country!
It's not the Church that is the problem, like a lot bigots suggest, but rather the politics of the DNC mostly that is allowing this to happen. If it weren't for the Catholic Church and its efforts to provide health care, education, and social services to others, as well as illegals, the government couldn't handle the pressure.
No thanks when you deserve praise for being Good Americans, and all criticism when you speak your peace for others.
How many Jews are here illegally? How many synagogues are covering for them? Aren't they deserving of the same criticism? Is it because they pay big money to earn masters' and doctorate degrees in Medicine? Law? Fine Arts and Design? Because they are better educated?
How many Muslims are here illegally? How many mosques are covering for these persons as well? No criticism as well? Is it because they pay big money to earn masters' and doctorate degrees in Medicine? Computer Engineering? Science Fields? Because they are better educated?
Hindus? Taoists? Buddhists? Sikhs? Why isn't anyone criticizing these faiths?
Eric Cartman | 1.14.10 @ 10:01AM
How many Illegal Whirling Dervishes are there? I don't know, but round them up (with the other flotsam and jetsam) and send them back! This isn't rocket science! BTW, we should keep all the rocket scientists.
timrife| 3.26.10 @ 2:45AM
Who gives you the right to exist anywhere, pal? You are pathetic.
Anna| 6.27.10 @ 11:35PM
What exactly does the CC Church teach on this? The CC of the Catholic Church that wealthier countries must welcome immigrants, but it also says the countries have the right to enforce laws to protect order and the well-being of it's current citizens. The bishops are taking a stance that is a FAR LEFT interpretation of this somewhat debatable issue. Many priests are preaching their opinions as fact and that is wrong. My priest went so far today to tell me that I'm not a citizen, that I'm a mere "visitor" in a country that my family has lived in and paid taxes for 4 generations. I found that highly offfensive.
Eric Cartman | 1.13.10 @ 6:39AM
"when their greatest sin is an overwhelming desire for a better way of life for themselves and their families. "
If that's all illegal aliens want, let them fix their own crappy countries instead of coming here. We are not the savior of the unwashed, uneducated and unemployed no matter what some statue in NY says - or the bishops. We are broke, Ms. Fabrizio, and adding millions of third graders - if they are lucky enough to reach that education level - is not "enriching" us. And these aren't "poor immigrants" we are talking about - they are illegal aliens who are ruining our schools, hospitals and cramming our prisons. They aren't saints!
When are people like you and the bishops ever going to hold Mexico and the rest of the third- world, piss-in-their-drinking-water countries accountable for their own mess? How many years should Mexico exist before they muster up enough brain power to figure out clean drinking water? Or schools? Or private property rights? Or just being honest?
Do you want to know how bad Mexico is? People risk their lives to swim across the Rio Grande , walk across miles of desert just to hang off the back of a garbage truck in Houston in 100 degree heat and 98% humidity while living in squalor and making a crap-hole of our inner cities. And you and your ilk think that's great! That we should have more of it! Sorry, go peddle your nonsense to people who are stupid enough to buy it.
Me again| 1.13.10 @ 6:44AM
BTW, it's policies like these that the priests at our church espoused that mad me stop going to church. I'm not supporting an institution that proposes stupid ideas. That's what Liberals do and if you want to see the result, drive through Detroit one night. Stop being stupid, Ms. Fabrizio.
Pamela| 1.13.10 @ 8:52AM
Eric, believe me, I understand your anger with the 'liberal' members of the Church, particularly clergy, but please reconsider walking away. The Church does not formally propose the liberal view of handling things; the stupid ideas are not doctrine. In fact, the Church is very adamantly opposed to the Marxist liberation theological view that many of our liberal clergy have embraced. The Church holds the fullness of the Truth of our Lord. Only some members of the Church propose the stupid and often immoral ideas. But do you 'go to church' for the priest, or the others sitting in the pew? No, you go for Christ, your savior. He is there, present in the Holy Eucharist, and he said, "Do this in memory of me." By all means, stop leaving a cent in the basket, or leave a note explaining your displeasure saying you will instead give to charities you trust and believe in, but do not walk away from the Lord. You only hurt yourself.
AllenG| 1.13.10 @ 11:11AM
If the Church is "adamantly opposed to the Marxist Liberation theological view," why aren't they doing something about those priests who espouse it? I do not belong to a hierarchical church- we don't have priests or bishops or the Pope. What we do have are leaders who are accountable for preaching the Gospel and seeing to the needs of the congregation.
The Catholic Church is a hierarchical church, and parish priests are responsible to their diocese and, ultimately, the Pope.
Here in the real world, when some subordinate acts against the stated goals of the organization, they get fired. Just sayin...
Also, beyone "Render unto Ceaser," there is that part in one of the Epistles where we are instructed to obey the secular authorities. Never once did the apostles protest being beaten or thrown into prison- that was what the secular authorities demanded. They did willingly pay that price to continue to spread the Good News about Jesus.
Similarly, if the Catholic Church believes that the borders of a Sovereign Nation are less important than reaching out to illegal immigrants, so be it. That doesn't change the right of the State to write and enforce laws which could even lead to priests being fined or thrown in jail.
Teflon93 | 1.19.10 @ 5:22PM
I'd say this is all the evidence you'd require, Allen:
Pope John Paul II's public rebuke of the Jesuit Sandinista Father Ernesto Cardenal on the tarmac during his 1983 Nicaraguan visit. The Catechism passage posted elsewhere in this thread by me nails it, but if you can find the video of the Pontiff shaking his finger in Cardenal's face it will confirm the Church's position in a most bracing and visceral fashion.
Eric Cartman| 1.13.10 @ 12:04PM
Sorry Pamela, the Church has done nothing to change my mind about it. The Diocese here is for illegal aliens and says so every chance it gets. I go to a Baptist church - the reverend is great: logical, sound biblical readings, missions to Mexico to help them there - not here, etc. I don't leave Sunday angry that my church is breaking the law and supporting Liberal idiocy. I feel better! The Church has gone over to the dark side.
I went to Catholic school most of my life (a few years of it in Malta) and can never remember the Brothers or Sisters teaching stupidity. I don't think one of them would have said "Hey, I have an idea that would make matters much worse! Let's try it!"
The Church has taken my money and put it to stupid ends. Sorry - they don't get to have my Sunday's to preach stupidity at me and mine. I would like to have one day to not be pissed off at hearing stupid crap.
G| 1.13.10 @ 11:03PM
"I go to a Baptist church - the reverend is great: logical, sound biblical readings, missions to Mexico to help them there - not here, etc. ...."
okaaaaaaayyyyyy......"Slaves, be obedient to your masters, masters be good to your slaves"...
....and the slave ships took a wrong turn on their way to Albuqueque. I digress.....I believe the discussion centered on illegal immigration?
The Catholic Church has never advocated, nor has it ever condoned, the breaking of immigration laws of this country. Why there are people who spread these innuendos and out right lies is beyond me.
Blame the politicians, don't blame the Church! who look the other way are
timrife| 3.26.10 @ 2:48AM
The immigration laws are cruel and unusual punishment by greedy paranoid people such as you.
Lisa| 6.25.10 @ 4:03PM
My pastor at the Catholic Church I attend in Houston very clearly condones the breaking of the immigration laws in this country. So does another one of our priests and our deacon. I'm so disgusted and frustrated that I want to picket outside the church! My pastor called anyone who supports the Arizona bill to enforce the existing law "Neo-Nazis" and members of the Ku Klux Klan during his homily! I had a heated discussion with him afterwards.
tertullian| 4.28.10 @ 10:02AM
EC, your reason is classic scapegoating, typical of those trying to justify abandoning the church for convenience sake. It's always someones fault except mine. And what happens after you have a disagreement with the baptist pastor, join Tom Cruise on his church or some other sect because now their preaching make sense? Stop running away from the truth...
Fredy| 12.8.10 @ 1:54PM
I am not a Catholic but I respect and agree with the Catholic church on this , what you call " stupidity " is the word of God , It seems that you have never read the bible or fail to live the message of Jesus in loving and helping those in need . I came here illegally , I am a Minister and It hurts me to see so much hate .The Catholic church is right on !
G| 1.13.10 @ 11:11PM
Honesty?
Inner city streets were sh*t even before the Mexicans got here...and incidentally, who are these people, as you say, that "risk their lives to swim across the Rio Grande , walk across miles of desert just to hang off the back of a garbage truck in Houston in 100 degree heat and 98% humidity while living in squalor ..."
While the blacks in New Orleans are sitting in public housing on welfare, it's that "mexican" that is cleaning up his city. So I ask, if the blacks made the New Orleans the human corrupt cesspool that it was and is, why is it that a mexican that has no emotional ties to the city want to make it a better place?
Eric Cartman | 1.14.10 @ 9:15AM
"who are these people, as you say, that "risk their lives to swim across the Rio Grande , walk across miles of desert just to hang off the back of a garbage truck in Houston in 100 degree heat and 98% humidity while living in squalor ..."
Good question - I would like to ask, but they all have fake IDs and run away when asked to show it. Judging buy their accent and the fact they can only say, "no Englaze" leads me to believe they are MEXICAN! But I digress. The blacks are sitting in public housing because the federal government helps them sit in public housing. Blacks have been the major victims here, as are lower class whites and Latinos - I group these people into a cohort called "Poor Americans" instead of the racial pigeon holes the Liberals like. The Liberals have made taking these jobs beneath the dignity of the poor, while begging for a hand out from the state is considered okay. They have allowed illegals to lower wages of many jobs to parity with the welfare state - so why hang off the back of a garbage truck in Houston?
And by the way, the Catholic Diocese advocates supplying food and water to Mexicans crossing the border illegally. THAT, G, is advocating breaking the law, ahole! When you are an enabler of illegal activity, you are also a conspirator of same.
Ret. Marine| 1.13.10 @ 6:47AM
Compassion is doing what is legally and morally correct first and foremost. This report reads something like " if it's hunky dorey to steal, then it must be hunky dorey to kill" afterall, it's not like many of immigrant's here illegaly are not doing just that.
I have to agree with Mr. Trancredo, this is only half of the truth. Charity first begins at home.
The political class has no spine, they are as guilty as the Pharisees. If they were concerned about charity they would have long ago secured these borders and kept the hordes from sucking this Nation dry under the guise of charity.
Frank Natoli| 1.13.10 @ 6:49AM
Do you help the poor by assuming, as the Church does, that (a) wealth and the pursuit of it is fundamentally sinful [that's why they called it the Protestant work ethic], and (b) wealth is finite and static and therefore it is the role of government to redistribute that finite and static amount?
Or do you help the poor by using the power of government to encourage the generation of wealth, to "promote the general welfare", and let the free markets choose where to allow the wealth to flow?
Forget Tancredo's comments. Try answering the Church's fundamental failure of reasoning described above, and its egregious consequences, Lisa.
G| 1.13.10 @ 11:34PM
Sorry Frank, the Church has never said that "wealth and the pursuit of it is fundamentally sinful". If it did, it wouldn't have included the parable of the Talents in the Bible.
The man with five talents who ended up with ten talents was praised by his master.
The man with three talents, who ended up with five talents was also praised by his master.
The man who had two talents and gained nothing, was chastised, and his talents was split between the other two.
It's not the Church, but people like Barack Obama that wants to take the Fifteen talents the other two had earned and give Five talents to the third man who did not take the time, nor the effort to invest his talents.
The Protestant Work Ethic? Hmmm....Chinese, Japanese, Indians, and Mexicans built the Pacific railroads, slaves from the Caribean and African countries picked the tobacco, and cotton in the south, and catholics, orthodox christians, and other "white trash protestants" [those considered to be not Protestant enough by other Protestants]worked in the stone quarries, coal pits and hell ovens of the steel mills in the East.....and all these people were not only paid top dollar for their work, but were justly compensated when they were injured? No!
The wealthy bled the poor as long as they could, and discarded them because they were, what they were, immigrants who were cheap labor. And the wealthy are still bleeding the immigrants in pay, and compensation, taking advantage of their lack of US Laws.
Enough with the cheap shots.
Appleby| 1.13.10 @ 7:11AM
If they are in need, help them personally (do not march with bullhorns demanding that money be extorted from legal immigrants and the native born and handed over to people here illegally) and when you know they are illegal, encourage them to turn themselves in or assist them to go back where they came from and come in the front door, and equip them for the journey.
If you have studied history at all, you know the way to break a siege and cause the enemy to surrender is to overwhelm the beseiged with massive numbers of extra mouths to feed. If your streets are flooded, you do not solve the problem by breaking down the levies and letting more water in.
Yes, we must render assistance to those in need. But we are not required to encourage lawbreaking by offering lawbreakers a large share of goods and services that we can only provide by extorting them through the government from people who themselvesare barely hanging on. This is not a lifeboat situation, not yet. But keep on pulling people aboard and before you know it the lifeboat will sink and everyone on board will be lost.
Joe Makley | 2.15.10 @ 9:33PM
I find your use of the term "native born," rather chilling. I was born in the US, but I certainly don't want to claim a higher status than those whose circumstances are more similar to those of a certain small family living in Egypt not so long ago. I find very little love in these postings. People can disagree on how best their churches, or their governments should serve the common good, but you can tell by the tone whether there is love (and thus hope) in the discussion. I'll be happier in a different forum. See ya later...
tatosian| 1.13.10 @ 7:51AM
"The misunderstanding of the Church's motives..."
The motive behind the catholic church's support of millions of foreign nationals illegally residing in this nation is not nearly as important (to me) as the disastrous effect that support has had on our culture and national unity.
The catholic church's efforts to balkanize my country continue apace (gutierrez's new amnesty bill is coming up shortly) and you quote scripture and mumble about moral imperatives?
Tell you what girlie, I'll suffer the disintegration of my society to please you and your illegals when the catholics start opening up planned parenthood franchises in the rectories and march in gay pride parades comprende?
Till then, I'll thank you to leave America to the Americans.
Denver Todd| 1.13.10 @ 7:56AM
Methinks that Fabrizio is a CINO (conservative in name only). She is running for office on the "I'll be the 60th vote" ticket.
Mike Plumstead| 1.13.10 @ 8:33AM
Denver Todd--Fabrizio is not a CINO---she's obviously someone who puts her faith before her politics. If all Catholics did this, America would be more conservative than Singapore.
maxsnafu| 1.13.10 @ 10:02AM
It would also be overrun with aliens and be America no more.
Teflon93 | 1.13.10 @ 8:31AM
The Church's principle of subsidiarity does come into play, however. No country can host all of the world's poor, which is the logical consequence of indifferentism toward borders.
We should bias our immigration policy toward those Christians who are persecuted in their homelands, not toward those whose geographic proximity affords an advantage. Mexico is merely one nation out of 180+. What about our obligations to Christians not born in close proximity to the U.S.? Shall they be crowded out by better-off Mexicans who simply want a big-screen?
We have a large Montagnard community in our parish. These are Vietnamese Catholics who have a proud history of aiding Americans during the decade of our involvement there. Many of these people have difficulty coming over despite having family in the States and despite being persecuted by the Communists. How many of them should be denied the opportunity taken by Mexicans who do not respect our laws nor our sovereignty?
I'm all for Mexican immigration so long as they follow the same rules and honor the same laws others do.
Alan Brooks| 1.13.10 @ 8:44AM
Anchor babies away.
L. Ross| 1.13.10 @ 11:38AM
nice.
JP| 1.13.10 @ 8:56AM
I think Lisa Fabrizio gives the US Bishops too much credit. They've fetishized immigration policy. To them it is an all or nothing situation. Either you let everyone in or you're immoral.
There is a very dark underside to the illegal alien situation; I'm not talking about just the exploitation of illegals. I've personally witnessed the destruction of a segment of our society these last 15 years due in part to illegals. The unskilled working poor have seen thier lives destroyed. On the one hand, many factory jobs have fled to cheaper shores (Mexico, India, China); on the other hand, many of the unskilled construction laborer jobs went to illegals. From assembly jobs, roofers, construction laborers, lawncare, agriculture to meat packing, distribution warehousing, and simple machinists work, the unskilled worker has seen either his wages drop or his work dry up. Even during the real estate construction boom there was a diminsihing pool of jobs for US workers. Temp agencies set up all over Mexico advertising steady work that was paid in cash (under the table of course) to any worker who could find his way to the US and purloin a SSAN card or ID. Firms all over the US jumped on the band wagon and began to contract thier work out to these temp agencies. One must remember, these illegals only worth was thier willingness to work for no benefits and below minimum wage.
In the mean time, millions of workers in the US were left out in the dark. For them, the recession began not in 2007, but in 2002. Even that last bastion of American manufacturing, the RV industry, began to take advantage of illegals.
American Bishops do have a moral obligation to see to thier own flock, so to speak. The Irish Bishop of New York, John Hughes, was famous for his protection of Irishmen in the ghettos of Manhatten -even if it meant going fist-to-cuffs. Bishop Dwenger in Ft Wayne was also known for his defence of German Catholics in northeast Indiana against the KKK -even if it meant the construction of "Catholic ghettos". Many of today's Bishop's do not have that kind of solidarity with the people they are charged to serve.
One of the most practical solutions to this issue is to create a guest worker's program. Every worker would recieve through thier employer work visas, and they'd be subject to the same laws and benefits that Americans have. But this solution has been all but ignored. Big business, the activists, and church leaders demand open borders and amnesty.
amberdru| 1.14.10 @ 8:48AM
We have numerous guest worker programs.
http://www.time.com/time/magaz.....91,00.html
Earl Deal's Smokey Holler Tree Farm in western North Carolina won the arboreal equivalent of American Idol in 2005 when one of its Fraser firs was chosen as the White House Christmas tree. Many of Deal's guest workers come back year after year. In turn, they are given decent housing and a legal way to earn a good wage. But when I visited them last year, many were jealous of the one worker at the farm who said he was in the U.S. illegally (like most other employers, Deal is simply unable to tell a good set of forged documents from the real thing). Why would legal workers be jealous of illegals? Because illegals can move freely. He's "like a bird," one of the guest workers told me quite earnestly. "He can move anywhere he wants." Others were also jealous, ironically, of an illegal's ability to set down roots in the U.S. The Senate plan provides the outlines of a path to citizenship for guest workers, but it first requires most of them to navigate a challenging schedule: two years in the U.S., followed by one year back home, then two more years in the U.S., one back home and so on. After eight years, they would get to stand in line for a green card.
Read more: http://www.time.com/time/magaz.....z0cauaqATV
Steve| 1.13.10 @ 8:57AM
Sorry, Lisa. Mr. Tancredo has the better argument by far. To the extent the Church wants to help, I suggest it get its collective backside down to Mexico and get the place straightened out. The Catholic culture has not distinguished itself in the various Latin American polities and for the bishops to argue for its wholesale importation into the US is both absurd and dangerous. No, no puede, senora.
This not anti-catholic, nor is it anti-immigrant. It is simply common sense. When one flies, one is advised by the crew to, in the event of an emergency, don one's oxygen mask first before helping others. That is common sense. The bishops seek to rip off America's oxygen mask, stick it in the face of someone who has no idea what to do with it, and everyone perishes. That is simply stupid.
donserge| 1.13.10 @ 9:00AM
The "church" (in Biblical context) is not the "world". "Brethren" in Biblical context is not "all people". Both terms are limited to true born anew believers. The Bible does not command believers to care for or feed the world. All benevolent references are personal (as in the parable of the Good Samaritan). Governments are never involved.
mike| 1.13.10 @ 9:03AM
By aiding illegals, the church makes the problem worse. A sane and compassionate solution to the problem is greatly increased LEGAL immigration and rigid enforcement of immigration laws. We have no obligation to the criminals of the third world or to those who just want a job. If they want a country, and are willing to contribute, then by all means, let them come. We will never get to this point as long as we create insentives for illegals to continue to come here. The church should focus on the big picture, not the small picture, which is making things worse.
Conan the Grammarian| 1.13.10 @ 9:04AM
If the good Catholic Bishops want to help, then let them start by helping in the countries from which most of these immigrants come, say, all of Latin America from Mexico to Argentina. Why should American Catholics be burdened with the Church's work. I suggest that the bishops stop being compassionate with Americans' money.
2Anglico| 1.13.10 @ 9:17AM
The old "render unto Ceasar..." addage again, huh? Ceasar would have put the Huns on the dole, right?
As to "doing to the least ..." That was a personal admonition, not a directive to force paying members of a society to provide food stamps and welfare checks, not to mention AUTOMATIC CITIZENSHIP to babies who "happen" to be born in a Texas border hospital. BTW, I think that it does not just "happen", I think they PLAN the US births!
L. Ross| 1.13.10 @ 11:42AM
To quote Alan Brooks:
"Anchor babies aweigh"
Doctor Right| 1.13.10 @ 9:43AM
This is the same kind of pablum I hear from my own Catholic mother whenever immigration is discussed:
"It's our duty to open our doors and help as many poor people as we can, whatever the cost...It's what Father [insert Irish surname] said at Mass last Sunday."
This bubble-headed attitude (Sorry, Mom!) has permeated the Catholic Church, and emboldened their "Liberation Theology" wing, which has become all too pervasive in this country, and around the world.
In essence, these folks are debasing their Faith into just another tenet of socialist dogma - Wealth is evil, redistribution is morally just, and Jesus was the world's first socialist.
The Pope and the Bishops, most of whom know next-to-nothing about economics, and have never worked in the private sector, need to focus on insisting that predominantly Catholic countries that abuse their citizens (Cuba, Venezuela, Mexico, etc) need to adopt free market reforms to help their people. The free market is the world's most humane economic system.
If they (the Pope and the Bishops) don't understand this, then they need to pipe down. And as someone who was raised as a Catholic but no longer adheres to their doctrines, I feel completely justified in my criticism.
Get a grip, Ms. Fabrizio.
Seapuss| 1.13.10 @ 11:09AM
Your mother and mine must know each other—and go to the same church!
The Catholic Church’s position on illegal immigration makes me want to pull my hair out.
People commit a variety of crimes out of economic desperation, including bank robbery, drug dealing, and prostitution. While I would not fault the Church for providing a hot meal, emergency shelter, or first-aid medical treatment to those in need on a “no questions asked” basis, I would not expect the Church to knowingly hide a bank robber, a drug dealer, or a prostitute from the police, or advocate the abolition of laws against bank robbery, drug dealing, or prostitution. Indeed, I would expect the Church to counsel the bank robber, the drug dealer, and the prostitute to turn themselves into the authorities—or at least to “go and sin no more”.
But the Church does something entirely different when it comes to illegal immigration. The law-breaker is hidden from the authorities and encouraged to continue committing his crime by staying in the United States (illegally). In addition, the Church advocates “reform” of immigration laws that is tantamount to abolishing those laws.
It is not immoral for a country to pass laws limiting who gets in and who can stay. Nor is it immoral for a country to enforce those laws. Resisting an immoral law is a Christian imperative. But resisting a moral law is embracing chaos.
maxsnafu| 1.13.10 @ 9:59AM
I'll listen to what the Church says about immigration reform (amnesty) when the Vatican starts taking in immigrants--lots of them.
Teflon93 | 1.13.10 @ 12:24PM
I was just about to post a similar sentiment.
It does no good to overwhelm prosperous countries with the uneducated poor. It merely destroys those countries' ability to meet the needs of its own poor.
The Vatican won't be admitting huge swells of immigrants because it cannot support them. Likewise, the U.S. cannot.
What we can do is provide for limited immigration (with assimilation, not ghettoization) for the poor of the world prioritized by those religiously and politically oppressed in their homelands. There are simply too many poor to allow economic hardship to be the determinant.
Joshua Chamberlain| 1.13.10 @ 10:12AM
Sorry, it became clear to me after actually reading "Caritas in Veritate" that the RCC's official position is socialism, no matter how much it may dislike the unsanctioned Marxist kind. It has just created its own version, variously called things like "social justice" and "distributism."
Havoc| 1.13.10 @ 10:42AM
rssg -
Tancredo is one of a very few politicians at the national level with a logical, rational position on the immigration issue. Bravo, rssg !!
Monca Benavidez| 1.13.10 @ 10:45AM
I am a Catholic that follows the dictates of my faith. I homeschool, go to daily Mass, we do not use contraception, and I firmly believe that this issue should be taken on by the Church and NOT imposed on the United States taxpayers. The church should subsidize the immigrants, and the bishops must address the unjust living conditions of their native countries. It is well within the natural law that countries have the right to make laws to protect itself and their citizens.
It would be wrong for individuals or mobs of individuals to demand their sacraments as they see fit. The fruit of lawlessness will have a terrible impact on everyone in this country, even immigrants and the Church. It would be fitting for the Bishops to address the greatest social justice , the right to life. The Catholic voter could end this evil, and the average Catholic voter needs direction from a strong leadership.
Teflon93 | 1.13.10 @ 12:27PM
The Church does take this on---it's a major effort on the part of Catholic Social Services.
However, the money for it comes from the faithful. In our parish, a sizeable chunk of our giving community is immigrants who have established themselves and give back in gratitude to help others. A recent fundraising campaign saw 30% of the donors come from one immigrant community which makes up perhaps 5% of parish households.
It is a better model than the welfare state.
Eric Cartman| 1.13.10 @ 2:28PM
And just think how these industrious "immigrants" could help their dilapidated countries if they went home, changed the political landscape, helped their people become a modern functioning society. We don't need ditch diggers anymore, but many countries do. And plumbers, electricians, etc. These people would be better using their talents in their own countries. Their comparative advantage would be worth more their than here. Go and help your fellow countrymen.
Eric Cartman| 1.13.10 @ 2:32PM
Sorry "worth more there than here." And by the way, why, Mr. Fabrizio, is it better for the US to be the relief valve for these rotten states to shove their responsibilities onto us? Does the Bible say anything about that?
Sean| 1.13.10 @ 10:53AM
The Catholic church is becoming more and more a joke. They push illegal immigration and now the pope is pushing the loony global warming charade. Hardly any of the Bishops stand up to the liberals and their millions of abortions.
Ret. Marine| 1.14.10 @ 5:40AM
If you read and think and understand the end times, it is not hard to make the connection of Rome ( the Catholic church) being the whore she is and what will become of her.
Diane| 1.14.10 @ 8:12PM
Excuse me, Sir. I have been married to the same man for about half a century and do not cheat on him, but I know some other women who hop from denomination to denomination to "find" a new man to remarry after the divorce. So which one of us is the whore.? I am Catholic by the way.
Norski| 1.13.10 @ 11:01AM
Apparently this author fails to see the difference between welcoming the legal, law abiding Stranger and welcoming the law-breaking Illegal Immigrant. Has she forgotten Christianity expects and equal dose of responsibility and accountability for every exhortation of love thy neighbor?
Conversely, I am unaware of any place in the Bible where God says go forth and commit crimes - identity theft, fraud, illegal entry. Nor have I found a passage that says the ends justify the means. And where does it say that having a need absolves one of having to obey the law?
But I have seen the following verses:
Romans 13: 1 Let every soul be subject to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and the authorities that exist are appointed by God. 2 Therefore whoever resists the authority resists the ordinance of God, and those who resist will bring judgment on themselves.
1 Peter 2: 13 Therefore submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lords sake, whether to the king as supreme, 14 or to governors, as to those who are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers and for the praise of those who do good.
John 10 Parable of the Good Shepherd: 1 Truly, truly, I say to you, he who does not enter by the door into the fold of the sheep, but climbs up some other way, he is a thief and a robber.
Luke 17: 3Pay attention to yourselves! If your brother sins, rebuke him, and if he repents, forgive him.
Maybe I missed something, but to date I have not seen any Illegal Immigrants come forward and turn themselves in to authorities, saying forgive me. Instead, I see many unrepentant Illegal Immigrants who have plenty of excuses as to why they broke the law, who continue to use false documents, who have plenty of demands to change our law, and who are quick to demand their rights. Is not breaking the law because you covet something your neighbor has a sin? Is not identity fraud bearing false witness and thus a sin? Thus is not forgiving unrepentant sin the same as condoning that sin, and thus participating in that sin? Or when it comes to Illegal Immigrants do those who support their actions believe that the Ten Commandments and other pronouncements against breaking the law are just guidelines to be ignored when inconvenient or when someone has a need?
If one had faith the size of a mustard seed one would know deported Illegal Immigrants are not going to their deaths nor are they going to Hades. If they learned anything while in the USA, deported Illegal Immigrants will work and fight to make their future bright no matter where they live. And if they are smart someday they may re-write history in their own country. If you believe God truly has a plan for each of us, is it not arrogance to assume that not getting your way is a bad thing? And is it not arrogance or delusion to assume that you can even know what that plan is?
Norski| 1.13.10 @ 11:14AM
Today there are 21.6 million Americans looking for work while 7.5 million Illegal Immigrants are working in the USA Illegally. Why do the Catholic Church and this Author stubbornly refuse to see the devastation wrought by Illegal Immigration on the poor American Worker? In the story of the Good Samaritan if Americans are the victims of law breaking behavior and Illegal Immigrants are those who break the law, I get the impression that the author would have the story of the Good Samaritan actually read as follows:
But when the Samaritan came upon the man lying by the side of the road, he approached the man and said on to him that he must surely be a rich man to have been robbed and beaten as he has. Therefore, as a rich man, he has earned what he has received. His greed and avarice, his lack of sharing his riches with the poor has led to his demise. And so the Samaritan passed by the beaten and robbed man and traveled down the road until he found those who had beaten and robbed him. He then set about ministering to the Robbers and paid for their stay in an Inn. They were obviously driven to rob and beat because they were poor, needed help, and were not getting it. And thus the beaten and robbed man learned that loving and respecting your neighbor as yourself only applies if your neighbor is poor.
L. Ross| 1.13.10 @ 11:50AM
Very nice.
Ret. Marine| 1.14.10 @ 5:43AM
Excellent
Dan| 1.13.10 @ 11:15AM
In an article that attempts to give a Catholic view of immigration reform, probably the most prudent thing to do would be to look at authentic Catholic teaching. If anyone has a question of the Catholic Church, first consult the Catechism of the Catholic Church, then go from there. A quick search of "Immigration" gives this result:
CCC 2241
2241 "The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him.
Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants' duties toward their country of adoption. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens."
Seems to make sense. Well to do countries should be more welcoming to prospective immigrants than countries that can barely get along. So we have a moral obligation to reach out to those who seek to escape the substandard conditions of their homeland.
Next, it speaks of the moral obligations of the immigrant. Given that civil authorities are entrusted to protect the common good, they rightfully set limitations and obligations upon the immigrant.
The last sentence is worth quoting again:
"Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens."
We already take in a huge number of immigrants legally as long as you go through the proper channels. Sure it may be difficult, and sometimes burdensome to apply for citizenship when your family is borderline starving, but remember that the host country has a right to place limitations on immigration for the common good of the host country.
It just seems to me that if we are trying to come to a more moral and more Catholic immigration policy, it should begin with immigrants themselves (Catholic ones specifically) obeying the laws of the the country they seek to immigrate to. Our very first law for prospective immigrants (and it is a just law) is DO NOT IMMIGRATE ILLEGALLY. If you come through the proper channels, you will be welcomed and given the rights of an American citizen.
Given that most immigrants from South America are Catholic, they would do well do follow the teachings of their Church and not break our laws.
Teflon93 | 1.13.10 @ 12:32PM
Ms. Fabrizio needs to reference the Catechism more, I would say.
We are obliged, of course, to a charitable view toward our brothers and sisters. Americans demonstrate this view in manifold ways: generous foreign aid, debt forgiveness, unparalleled charitable giving, a commitment to legal immigration. In light of this, who will have trouble standing before the Lord and saying, "Yes, Lord, I have loved my neighbor as myself"?
I don't see how national suicide is the bar by which we are judged. The Catechism doesn't say so. The Church doesn't say so. So why does Ms. Fabrizio?
Soso| 1.13.10 @ 11:17AM
The Catholic church wants women to have kids but they don't helps to pay for the cost! That is why I use birth control pills. If they want to help illegal aliens, take them to the Vatican and give them jobs there. The Vatican is a country and thus inmigration reform should star with the Catholic Pope hismself. The Catholic Church is allied with the radical environmentalists and commies in order to survive. Just like they allied themselves with Hitler and help to kill millions of Jews!
The Catholic Church is a hypocrate church!
Teflon93 | 1.13.10 @ 12:38PM
Oh, nonsense on stilts!
The Church doesn't tell you to have sex, does it? She doesn't order you to get married, either.
Your ignorance is lamentable and probably invincible. Why don't you look up what Golda Meier had to say about the Church's role in saving Jews during the Holocaust, or are you an anti-Semite as well as an anti-Catholic?
Let's not forget all the Catholic priests who perished in those same concentration camps either. For shame!
G| 1.13.10 @ 11:53PM
Kristallnacht occurred on Martin Luther's Birthday about 400 years to the day .
And it was Martin Luther who advocated that, and I am paraphrasing, "if the Jew didn't convert, then synagogues should be burned....books should be burned...properties confiscated.....the duty of the government is to round them up and to rid a country of them (mass deportation)."
Finland, Sweden, Denmark?, Germany, and Belgium too? all belonged to the official state religion, the Lutheran Church. And interestingly, all death camps that killed Jews, as well as Catholics, other poor souls, were in Poland and Ukraine (both having high concentrations of Catholic and Jewish populations).
Oh yeah, Pope Pius is credited with saving 850,000 Jews...that's 850,000 than the Lutheran Church, 850,000 more than the Ukrainian Orthodox Church or the Russian Orthodox Church....
....and the Catholic Church worked endlessly to end Communism with millions being martyred for the Faith.
So that pretty much blows your theory out of the water.
So that
G| 1.14.10 @ 12:00AM
"The Jew and his Lies" by Martin Luther.
It is documented to be a must read if you are a white supremacist, or neo nazi and is well read by these hate groups which hate Jews, Catholics, Blacks, and Asians, but ironically not Protestants!
I am a Catholic American, not a bigot! I am just clarifying my above point. Use Google or Yahoo and search "Luther+Nazism" or "Luther+Anti-Semitism"...it speaks for itself.
God Bless the US Always, and our Troops in Harm's Way!!!
Sara| 1.13.10 @ 11:19AM
If the pro invasion forces continue to hold sway in this country, they are going to kill the golden goose.
Overpopulation and shifting the church's duty of "charity" to the world's poor - in their own countries - over to the US taxpayer is theft.
Unchecked illegal immigration, because of it's overpopulation, it's wanton theft of other people's lives and it's ignorance of what created the golden goose it wishes to raid, is central to the culture of death.
Max| 1.13.10 @ 11:49AM
What about the moral responsibility for immigrants to create in the places God put them, their own countries, the freedoms and opportunities that others sacrificed to create in the United States?
Tony in Central PA| 1.13.10 @ 11:49AM
We have an illegal immigration problem in this country because we have an enormous labor market for jobs that Americans either won't or can't perform. Neither party is going to do much about it. The Democrats want open borders to build up their Welfare State base. The GOP wants them to make businesses competetive by keeping labor cheap. The situation is the result of the relative prosperity we've experienced over the past few decades and the demographic and cultural changes that accompany it. I'm not really sure how many Americans would support an immediate border lockdown if they knew how it might affect their lives. There must be a better way.
L. Ross| 1.13.10 @ 11:57AM
I disagree. There is no job Americans will not take. There are simply jobs where the employer will not pay enough to attract Americans. My brother-in-law works in the sanitation (sewage) department in San Francisco. This is not glamorous work, but it does pay well. His career field is not filled with illegal immigrants. The true result of illegal immigration is depressed wages for the bottom of the American labor force. The people who illegal immigrants are hurting the most is their American born labor competitors. Americans at the bottom of our labor pool are feeling the real pain. Our uneducated, unskilled labor force have fewer job opportunities and lower wage opportunities because of illegal immigration.
I'm just sayin'.
Tony in Central PA| 1.13.10 @ 12:14PM
A small example of what I'm getting at : I used to work for a moving company in my younger days. It was hard work, but the pay was decent ( and under - the - table, by the way ). I used to check back with the place from time to time after I went off to school. Each time, I was being told it was getting progressively harder for them to find help. The work was hard, but the pay was similar to jobs at the mall, and again, the pay was under - the - table. It didn't matter that it was in a college town with lots of young, healthy guys who needed money. The reason for the labor shortage became familiar, " Kids won't do this kind of work anymore ".
Fast forward to the late 90's when my wife and I were moving in a different town. We had problems getting it scheduled because they couldn't get enough help. I asked them why when there was a branch campus for PSU nearby teaming with young, able - bodied men ? The same refrain, different town, " Kids won't do this kind of work anymore ". We moved again in 2006. It was October, which is usually a slow time for movers but they were having trouble getting labor. I offered to help, and its a good thing I did or it would have taken more than one day. The movers were impressed with how hard I worked. They would have been more impressed if I were 25 years younger.
Ali| 1.13.10 @ 12:32PM
Funny thing, but when I mentioned working in a fast food place to my nieces, they told me that that's a job for "immigrants", meaning low-paid and full-time. On the other hand, both of them did the jobs "immigrants" purportedly do, from baby sitting to mucking out stables. As long as the price, er, wage is right...
JP| 1.13.10 @ 1:18PM
And I used be a construction laborer during high school in the summer. I worked mainly with guys from 20-45. We did the grunt work, but we were paid well. The most senior made about $10/hour (a lot money in 1979). There used to be 1-2 pages of adverts in the spring for this seasonal work. Not anymore. The construction companies work with illegal temp firms who bus in illegals by the hundreds. None of these workers make more than $50 a day; the construction firms do not have to withhold social security, pay overtime, or offer even workman's comp. Do the math. Luckily, at least 4 companies in my area got busted by INS in 2007.
I live in the western end of the rust belt. Until 2005, there was plenty of work for unskilled manual labor. Illegals steal a man's ability to provide for his family. At least outside of PSU, there are plenty of people willing to do "the work no one else is willing to do." But they won't do it at $2 an hour.
Tony in Central PA| 1.13.10 @ 2:20PM
When I worked for North American Van Lines in 1981, I got six bucks an hour under the table. When I last worked for them in 1983, it was seven. The minimum wage at the time was three - something. I'm not sure what the rate for this kind of work is nowadays, but I'm sure its still above the minimum wage.
Another thing worth remembering is that for much of Reagan's office and most of Bush Sr., Clinton and Bush Jr. we had full employment in this country. This had some pretty profound effects on things, and I'm sure it drastically increased the ability and willingness of companies to use undocumented aliens mostly as a cost - saving measure. After a short time, it became the way of doing business for many outfits.
I think another byproduct of our relative prosperity since the 80's is the consumerization of a college education. Maybe education is for everyone, but should that always imply a B.S. degree ? There are too many in college who don't know why they are there. There are a significant number of them who'd be much better off economically if they'd decided to become tradesmen. I know the local PSU branch campus had a dropout rate of almost 60% ten years ago.
JP| 1.13.10 @ 12:03PM
Tony, you obviously do not know what you're talking about. American will do about any kind of work; but they will not do it for $2 an hour. It wasn't too long ago to see Americans do construction work; any kind of factory work; work in meat packing industries; agricultural work as well as work in sanitation and street maintaince. Most of these all went to illegals from 2001-2007. Illegals are willing to work under the table for cash, as well as forgo any kind of benefits. It's funny that the same people who lobby for a "living wage" are all for illegals and open borders.
BREDNG10| 1.13.10 @ 7:17PM
Quite often I go to my local large chain grocery store on payday.On many occasions I have seen hispanics pay for full carts of foodstuffs (lots of steaks etc),with link cards.The link cards are Illinois version of food stamps,but on credit card like plastic.These same people then go over to the service counter,cash their check and send $$$ by Am Express to mexico.I have seen this on many occasions and have hung around in line and the amt`s have been as much as $3-$4 hundred.This is probably repeated thousands of times weekly(daily)in Illinois and in all the 50 states all over america.
Seek| 1.13.10 @ 12:35PM
Lisa Fabrizio is no more than policy wonk than she is a film critic. Nothing is more ruinous of a nation's identity than unrestricted access from outside. A nation-state is to a sovereign what a parcel of land is to its individual owner. In each case, the principle of exclusivity applies.
Tom Tancredo understands this; Lisa Fabrizio, her aggressive sentimentality intact, doesn't.
bwn| 1.13.10 @ 12:35PM
With high unemployment (here in Michigan, the official rate is around 17%, bound to be actually higher in reality), anyone who advocates for more immigration - legal and/or illegal should be have their mouth duct taped but good.
As said above, this country needs a REDUCTION in all immigration for about ten years, then we can revisit the issue at that time. We are under no obligation to accept half of Mexico and half the world.
Teflon93 | 1.13.10 @ 12:47PM
And lest anyone listen to the anti-Catholic bigots warped view of history (ironically apparently initiated by the KGB disinformation shop in the same fashion as the CIA-caused-AIDS nonsense), here is what Golda Meier said about Pope Pius XII:
"During the 10 years of Nazi Terror, when our people went through the horror of martyrdom, the Pope raised his voice to condemn the persecutors and to commiserate with their victims. The life of our time has been enriched by a voice which expressed the great moral truths above the tumults of daily conflict. We grieve over the loss of a great defender of peace." (Civilita Catholica 1958, III, 232)
Another Israeli PM, Moishe Sharat:
"I told Pope Pius XII that my first duty was to thank him and, through him, the Catholic Church on behalf of the Jewish public for all they had done to the various countries to rescue Jews. We are deeply grateful to the Catholic Church."
Albert Einstein concurred:
"Only the Church stood squarely across the path of Hitler's campaign for suppressing the truth. I never had any special interest in the Church before, but now I feel a great affection and admiration because the Church alone has had the courage and persistence to stand for intellectual truth and moral freedom. I am forced to confess that what I once despised I now praise unreservedly." Einstein and God by Dr. Thomas F. Torrance (emphasis added) "The Evening News", Baltimore, April 13, 1979
Disagreeing with Ms. Fabrizio on her interpretation of the Church's teaching on immigration, charity toward the poor, et al does not require embracing the anti-Catholic bigots and their bag of slanders.
Majito Querido| 1.13.10 @ 1:14PM
Now, if my memory does not fail me regarding this conflict, the Jewish population in Europe were not trying to illegally migrate to it, right? Were they not actually trying to leave Europe but the furnaces got in the way?? Don't know where this come from in this topic, but the folks trying to come here with no authorization are not being round up and burnt up, are they? They're just given a free trip back to their homelands.
Margie| 1.13.10 @ 3:17PM
Contrary to popular belief, being anti-Catholic does not make one a bigot. The doctrines my friend, the doctrines.
Under God's law, in which Christ Himself fulfills, a person is allowed to call it as he sees it.
What is truly unfair though, is using the seemingly favorite word, bigot to describe anyone who dares to disagree with it.
Teflon93 | 1.13.10 @ 7:54PM
The Ten Commandments, summarized by Christ's two, remain the Supreme Doctrine, Margie. IF you'd bothered to read the post I was responding to above, you would see that that person falsely claimed that the Catholic Church collaborated with Hitler in killing Jews during the Holocaust.
Or does whichever community you belong to deny that bearing false witness is a sin?
Margie| 1.13.10 @ 10:15PM
Jesus said~ "Think not that I have come to abolish the law and the prophets; I have come not to abolish them but to fulfil them." Mt. 5:17.
~Anyhow, I was responding to your few last words, nothing else.
Teflon93 | 1.18.10 @ 9:32AM
Indeed, does the commandment not to bear false witness bind Christians or not?
GrayRiv| 1.13.10 @ 12:53PM
We have exactly three options: 1) Try to deport or drive out 12,000,000 people who are living here illegally, working, and raising families, but as we know, that frankly isn't going to happen even though some people want it to.
2) Tolerate an underground of 12,000,000 people who float outside society, with different rights and responsibilities, but almost all of us find this unacceptable (for a range of reasons); and
3) get most of the 12,000,000 into the system, on-the-books, fully taxed, with rights on the job so they can stand with us for better wages and working conditions and integrate into society.
If we can get the hardliners out of the way, we can solve the illegal immigration problem and make us one country again.
William R| 1.13.10 @ 12:57PM
Nonsense. All we need to do is enforce the laws already on the books and most illegals will begin to self deport. Work place raids is a good place to start. No jobs they have no reason to be here.
Majito Querido| 1.13.10 @ 1:19PM
GrayRiv states another statistical lie...12 million?? really who counted them? btw, you may have overlooked how the border mexican towns are crying at the increased number of students that have arrived since the housing bubble bursted in the us and no more jobs...i know that for a while it appeared that we had to get new gardeners at least twice per month...folks just never came back and one wondered...was it ice or just no work...so 12 million??? hmmm doubt it...
and btw, did you see how Canada fixed their illegal Portugese migrations? How about Holland with their Islamic immigrants (legal or not)...they all got the same trip back home...by the hundreds of thousands not just a few hundred...
bwn| 1.13.10 @ 1:58PM
Fantasy, liberal fantasy....... First, there are surely more than 12 million "poor, downtrodden, in the shadows". Probably more like 20 million. Secondly, we must think about numbers and the rules for "family unification" as it pertains to immigration must be changed. For so many immigrants (legal and illegal) plan and look forward to sponsoring tens of millions more of "their people" to come to the US. This must be stopped.
Enforce the law and a great many illegals will "self-deport". Do not allow them to work, do not school their children and they will go home. It's that simple. It's a matter of having the will and a backbone to implement it. As the economy continues to worsen under big government/statism, more and more Americans will demand deportation.
Majito Querido| 1.13.10 @ 1:09PM
One item often overlooked by folks like Ms. Frabrizio and her bishops is the mandate in scripture to obey all laws and seek God as the supplier of all needs not government/church. It'll also do good to look at what happened in the church at Jerusalem when it went re-distributing all wealth with no regards...it suffered famine and it took the collections of the poor Thessalonian church to feed them. Paul wrote about this in his letters. When Jesus was confronted with paying taxes, he sent Peter get a fish from the lake, opened its mouth and there it was a coin to pay the tax...
Ms Fabrizio ignores that according to New Testament theology, governments were placed by God to rule and one can't please God violating their laws. In God's economy (and hopefully the Bishops') the ends do not justify the means...as God asked Cain: 'If you do the right thing, will you not be rewarded?' But he did not do the right thing, did he?
Just like these Bishops, they do a disservice to these folks encouraging the continual law breaking.
If I'm coming at this from the Christian perspective, then I must first comply with God's mandates. Ignoring them is insane. I can't make it to heaven willingly violating God's law and placing instead my own bleeding heart wishes and desires, which by the way The Books warns against human heart as being deceitful...
Warren Piece| 1.13.10 @ 1:16PM
It is not just the Catholic Church which seems to have a "soft" view on immigration. The Lutheran Church (ELCA) among others often speaks as if illegal immigration (Pro) is a matter of settled Christian doctrine.
We can only wonder if something else is going on here. One can’t help but suspect that the passion of all our divines would be dampened somewhat if our new "neighbors" turned around and registered as Republicans.
Still, in my humble view, I believe the righteous response is to assist on protecting our sovereignty on the one hand and caring for all immigrants on the other. How we work out the two is a matter of prudential judgment.
qwilly| 1.13.10 @ 1:23PM
Charity out of another persons pocket, or the national coffers, is not charity, but stealing for your own purposes.
Warren Piece| 1.13.10 @ 1:47PM
Yes, this is why the Church should use its own "pocket" instead of storming the steps of the Capital "advocating" for the illegals.
On the other hand, if "stealing for your own purposes" is your concern, our larger problem is taxation.
bwn| 1.13.10 @ 1:59PM
Fantasy, liberal fantasy....... First, there are surely more than 12 million "poor, downtrodden, in the shadows". Probably more like 20 million. Secondly, we must think about numbers and the rules for "family unification" as it pertains to immigration must be changed. For so many immigrants (legal and illegal) plan and look forward to sponsoring tens of millions more of "their people" to come to the US. This must be stopped.
Enforce the law and a great many illegals will "self-deport". Do not allow them to work, do not school their children and they will go home. It's that simple. It's a matter of having the will and a backbone to implement it. As the economy continues to worsen under big government/statism, more and more Americans will demand deportation.
Sheila| 1.13.10 @ 2:00PM
I hardly know what to add - such a plethora of good, solid, well-reasoned comments today! I recall reading other columns by Ms. Fabrizio, just as poorly thought out and articulated. I refuse to accept her dictum that my Christian faith and my patriotism must be in conflict. I refuse to give charitable assistance to anyone in this country illegally; I give generously to those in genuine need in their home countries. The gospel is a message for personal and spiritual transformation, which is then spread from individual to individual, soul to soul. It is not a public policy document or a mandate for liberal-style social justice. Tower of Babel, anyone? (Oh, right, we're living there already.)
JP| 1.13.10 @ 2:52PM
I don't know I would go so far as to deny anyone charity. If a foreign couple came to my house looking for food, shelter or medical care I certainly would help in any way possible. The last thing I would ask is to see thier Green Card. I hope this was the sort of Caritas the Holy Father wrote about recently.
But just the same, it isn't moral for foreigners to come here and make it impossible for me to support my family (with the blessings of our President and Bishop to boot).
Joe B| 1.13.10 @ 2:02PM
Legal immigration brings in a million people a year with an average IQ of 89 by may calculation using the numbers in "IQ and the Wealth of Nations" and government data. Clearly we are importing poverty, crime, and disease -- since high IQ has been shown to be a good proxy for good health, high economic productivity, and law abiding behavior. Since a free society cannot restrict reproduction by its cretinous citizens, perhaps we should stop importing cretins and expel illegal aliens, who are overwhelmingly cretinous.
The hell with the Catholic Church. Lets sell all the church property in the US to pay for the medical bills of illegal aliens.
Brittanicus| 1.13.10 @ 2:06PM
Bloggers don't have to state to Americans the--BILLIONS--of dollars this will cost--as its costing now in free unrevealed monies that supports illegal immigrant families, stolen by the tax system. Never have I seen people so angry with this administration that is spending the lives of our grandchildren future. The blame cannot even be attributed to those in power now, but through many presidents have we been subsidizing the welfare of illegal families.We must enforce E-Verify illegal labor identification system, 287 (g) police arrest, ICE raids and tell our lawmakers, don't compromise the American way of life by importing poverty and habitual criminals, IF YOU WANT TO APPROVE A TRILLION DOLLAR COMPREHENSIVE IMMIGRATION POLICY THAT'S YOUR CHOICE. BUT IF YOU ARE TIRED OF SUPPORTING THE REST OF THE WORLD, YOU BETTER SPEAK UP BEFORE ITS TOO LATE. Call the Capitol Switchboard at 202-224-3121 to be connected to your Senator and Congressman and use the voting power of THE PEOPLE. NUMBERSUSA AND JUDICIAL WATCH for more frightening information and which lawmaker are signers to the potential AMNESTY and the immigration grades of these proponents. REMEMBER ANOTHER BLANKET AMNESTY WILL ULTIMATELY LEAD TO UNSUSTAINABLE OVERPOPULATION.
jh | 1.13.10 @ 3:10PM
I think your comment is instructive. It used to be the line was Hey I have no problem with immigration just illegal immigration.
It has slightly shifted, partly because organziations like NUMBERSUSA are in the forefront of this and they have a much larger agenda on immigration.
So hopefully we can use this debate to again examine if such organziations are truly conservative or if they are what conservative strain of thought are they adovocating for and what conservatives schools of thought they are against
Derek Leaberry| 1.13.10 @ 2:26PM
As a Roman Catholic (Latin Mass), I assuredly know that the bishops are very wrong on this issue. Massive Third World immigration is not only corrosive of the historic American culture but it wrecks havoc on Third World nations, cultures and families. To be charitable, most bishops tend to be not only naive about the world, they are insulated by the problems created by what is truly a migration or invasion. Luckily, my priest would never venture to utter liberal immigration nonsense. He'd lose most of his flock if he did.
Sadly, one issue where The American Spectator veers left is immigration. It shares this distinction with The Wall Street Journal and the neo-conservatives. On this vital issue, the most important existential issue of the historic American nation, The American Spectator is on the wrong side. Cultural conservatives have no friends at The American Spectator, The Wall Street Journal or The Weekly Standard. That is apparent.
jh | 1.13.10 @ 3:08PM
I am not so sure what you mean by cultural conservative. I am on ein many regards and I think the author is right.
I don't what Church you go too but I am happy to say that in mine even if people disagree over this issue they would not leave the CHurch or the Blessed Sacrament over it
Joel E. Wischkaemper| 1.13.10 @ 2:29PM
No matter how you cut it.. no matter what the Catholic Church does, using the Church's money to politically lobby is profoundly wrong and ugly. If the church told members to write their congress people it would be fine. When they summoned the Senators to the Bishops office and told them how to vote, they committed a crime.
And in the end, the Catholic Church will help the illegal aliens in this country. But while they do it, the American Taxpayers will be forking up over 2.6 trillion dollars for that amnesty.
The Catholic Church is trying to spend my money for the illegal aliens. Believe me.... don't push it any further.
JH | 1.13.10 @ 3:15PM
No the Chruch is not committing a crime by adovcoating a postion and talking to Congressmen. I can go through the regs if you wish.
I often see the Church bashed by liberals!! Seperation of Church and State!! Usually that is code for OH MY GOSH I DON't LIKE WHAT YOU ARE SAYING Can we shut you up.
It is distatesful when they do it. Its even more distasteful when conservatives that should know better do it.
Virginia| 1.13.10 @ 2:53PM
As the daughter of a legal immigrant mother now deceased and an American born Caucasin father I have to say I get pretty steamed when people advocate for immigration without the "legal" part. My mother came here legally. She was so busy learning English and assimilating that she never taught me Spanish. Something I really regret since I don't, at present, have time to devote to learning the language. We are all here because some ancestor immigrated here from some other country. Except back in the "old"days, they weren't afraid to refuse entry, if you were ill with a potentially deadly disease. They weren't afraid to deport you if you didn't meet the criteria for entering the country. All those immigrants came looking for a better life but none of them came looking for a hand out or to cheat the system and get benefits they weren't entitled to. They came , they suffered and they worked hard. Some of them made a better life and some died trying. But it was unthinkable to ask for a handout. They had their pride. To ask for a handout meant they were a failure. Today, its the norm. I have heard horror stories about US citizens trying to get back into the US from Canada after they went there to visit or vacation. But we just can't seem to manage our Southern border. Something is very wrong here. Until the US Gov't gets off its PC horse, we will continue to have these issues. By the way, I seem to remember St. Paul saying something about obeying the laws set down by the government in the country in which you live. To my knowledge, charity and mercy aside, the Church, regardless of what denomination, is not except from that.
jh | 1.13.10 @ 3:04PM
To Lisa Fabrizio
Thank you for writing this and thank you to the AMerican Specator for running this. Despite the yelling and screaming and the attempt to drown out the TANCREDO view is not the only conservative viewpoint on this tough issue.
Thanks again.
explosion proof floodlight | 11.25.10 @ 1:57AM
For most Americans, Obama doesn't seem to be giving them something they don't have, but instead to be taking away something they already value.
Margie| 1.13.10 @ 3:06PM
"Consider this from fallen-away Catholic, Tom Tancredo:"
...thankfully, "falling away" from is the Catholic church does not equal falling away from God!
JP| 1.13.10 @ 4:50PM
I wonder how long it would be before people would get in thier anti-catholic jabs.
Margie| 1.13.10 @ 5:26PM
Read my post, above @ 3:17.
You're a liar, JP.
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 1:29PM
Might want to reflect on that good fruit, Margie.
As well as the definition of "liar", which you seem to read as "someone who disagrees with me."
Lack of charity on your part gives Ms Fabrizio's argument more sting than it otherwise has on its merits. Look at the reaction to Pat Robertson's diatribe against the Haitians today---that's how you look in this thread on a smaller scale.
It necessarily makes one wonder if you would have problem with immigration were som many of these immigrants Word of Faithers rather than Catholics.
Margie| 1.15.10 @ 5:32PM
Teflon is an apt description of you.. you're just as slippery as good old JP. I said that falling away from the Catholic Church is NOT falling away from God. That's the truth. In your typical sleazy way you join with JP in accusing me of being anti-Catholic. So, that makes you a liar as well.
You are completely un-Biblical, not to mention quite despicable.
Teflon93 | 1.18.10 @ 9:48AM
More ad hominems only undermine your position, Margie.
On what authority do you claim that falling away from the Church isn't falling away from God?
Chapter and verse, please.
As for my being "completely un-Biblical", you are quite sadly mistaken, as you will note allusions to the Bible throughout my posts.
Why, here is another:
Matthew 16:18 "And I say to you that you are Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."
The Church is not the shifting sand you would have it be, nor is it invisible, nor did it come into existence at some mysterious undefined point some 1,500 years or more after Pentecost. All such notions are definitively refuted by Christ's description of it here---built upon rock, lasting, impregnable, and built upon Peter, not Henry VIII nor Martin Luther nor any other self-proclaimed "reformer".
As for "falling away", yes indeed it is damnable, if St Paul and Christ are to be believed (and they are!):
"If thy brother shall offend against thee, go, and rebuke him between him and thee alone. If he shall hear thee, thou shalt gain thy brother. And if he will not hear thee, take with thee one or two more, that in the mouth of two or three witnesses every word may stand. And if he will not hear them, tell the Church. And if he will not hear the Church, let him be to thee as a heathen and a publican." (Matt. 18:15–17)
Where shall they go if the Church is an invisible transdenominational community of believers? You'll note my rebuke of anti-Catholic bigots in this fashion; they misstate what the Church teaches---evidence is in the Catechism---for malicious purposes.
Not falling away is crucial, for as Christ says, ""He who endures to the end will be saved" (Matt. 24:13). What does that imply for those who do NOT endure?
St Paul was quite aware of this:
"See then the kindness and the severity of God: severity toward those who have fallen, but God’s kindness to you, provided you continue in his kindness; otherwise you too will be cut off" (Rom. 11:22
"Continue in his kindness"---or else!
Philippians 2:12 says, "Therefore, my beloved, as you have always obeyed, so now, not only as in my presence but much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling."
And so indeed we do, Sister Margie. Indeed we do.
Margie| 1.18.10 @ 10:08PM
No matter what you say, oh arrogant one, it does not matter one iota! It is Christ Himself who is the Cornerstone, it is Christ Himself who is the True Vine. The Church is the body of His believers, and not a physical building. You can throw stones and insult and try and demean me for speaking the truth, but it doesn't matter, you are already lost. And that is why you will continue to call all who speak the truth about your lies, that the Catholic Church and falling away from it equals falling away from Christ.
Continue on as you will. It is you that bears false witness. You do so against all Christians when you do so against me. Because Christianity is based on Christ Himself, not a false Religion with doctrines of demons. A Church that protects child molesters, a Church that forbids Marriage, a Church that proclaims men to to take the place of God, and bow down to a man as if he is Christ Himself. You are entitled to your false Religion. And I am entitled to declare it what it is.
Teflon93 | 1.19.10 @ 3:19PM
Did anybody spot any Scripture at all in Margie's bigoted little screed above?
Or a response to that I posted?
Settles it for me: Margie's problem is not with illegal immigration at all but with Catholics. If large numbers of Fundamentalists were coming over the border illegally, no problem for Margie!
Margie| 1.19.10 @ 10:58PM
Of course I am a bigot to you because I speak the truth. That is your usual "ad hominom" method of attack.. I notice a pattern here. If someone dares to confront one of your pals' untruths~ you conveniently pull out the "bigot" card. Well that makes you a liar! You wear it well. It doesn't work with me. I may be one of the rare souls who dares to speak the truth but so be it.
You're nothing but a low life liar. And actually, you are what you accuse me of being. It is perfectly ok for you to insult and charge me with false accusations.. why? Because you're a Catholic! Ha! You are a joke! "fundamentalists" coming over the border? Why.. how bigoted of you. In truth you despise Christians. It is quite clear.
How does it feel to be a liar there Teflon?
The truth: You are not falling away from God if you leave the Catholic Church. The Catholic Church has absolutely no authority over anyone and is a completely un-Biblical, corrupt organization. Do not be fooled, or scared into a corner by these haughty holier-than-thou liars who use the bigot card.
There is a way of escape from sin. Only one way. It is through Christ Himself! Jesus said "I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life. No one comes to the Father but by Me." Jn. 14:6.
Teflon93 | 1.22.10 @ 9:37AM
Wow, Margie---glad to see you don't engage in "ad hominem"s! (Is there anyone who cleans your clock in a Scriptural debate whom you don't call a liar?)
You apparently don't know your Church history. Ask yourself: to whom was St Paul addressing his epistles? You need to go back and read the Early Church Fathers to cover the gaps in your knowledge. As the great man said, "to be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant".
In the meantime, you certainly ought to stop asserting your---unique---interpretations of Scripture and Christianity as though you were Pope Margie I.
And you might want to admit that your issue with immigration is not immigration per se but too many Catholics coming in. Given your hatred of the Church and inability to speak rationally about her---note how you have been called out multiple times on your errors of fact regarding Church teaching and yet call faithful Catholics "liars"---you're quite transparent on the subject.
I happen to oppose Ms. Fabrizio's position on immigration and agree that the law ought to be enforced. I am "arguing against interest" as it were, if as you claim my interest were simply "more Catholics". Far from calling everyone who opposes open borders "bigots", I happen to agree with them.
That said, you, madame, are an anti-Catholic bigot. Ark, who posted just the once, may well be. I haven't seen anyone else in the thread who qualifies.
It is true that you really do undermine your credibility on this issue with your ranting and raving about the Church. Your lack of charity is galling in that regard, and will no doubt lead other Christians to give Ms. Fabrizio's argument more weight than it would otherwise have out of sheer horror at being on the same side of the argument as you and those who think like you.
I'm sure you're a very nice lady beyond Internet postings and I wish you the best. The last word is yours.
JmsA| 1.13.10 @ 3:15PM
On this, Ms. Fabrizio, you're just plain wrong. If the Catholic Church wishes to help these folks, they should endeavor to help them at home, not encourage them to come and stay here, ILEGALLY. Illegal aliens are so defined by the fact they not only disrespect and break our laws, but in doing cause great detrimen to our and our children's well beign and future. They believe the southwest U.S., though they settled all over the U.S., belongs to them, and thus refer to it as "occupied territory" by Gringos or Gabachos, if not worse deregatory terms. Out here in So.Cal., young Mexican-Americans, and other so called hispanics, though able to perfectly speak English, always invariably revert to speaking Spanish among themselves in school or at work, etc., betraying their innermost wish to only partially assimilate into the U.S., and never lose their Mexican, Salvadoran, Guatemalan, etc., identity. I know this for a fact because upon hearing my fluent, non-Mexican Spanish accent, they almost always immediately stop speaking Spanish to me and begin to speak in English, because in part as they themselves have told me, usually with great joy and dismissiveness towards me, that I do not deserve to enter their self-centered, ethnic domain, because I'm not part of their race, or as they put it, "Raza." The parents of many of these achor babies, as they are commonly referred to, if they have actually attained any level of education in their respectives countries, usually hold socialistic views, including that America is a rich country and could easily bare the burden of their needs for jobs, healthcare, education, etc., etc.;--that is, of course, when they're not lauding and exulting Che Guevera, Fidel Castro, or just about any third-rate, tin-pot anti-American despots. Illegal aliens are mostly people that believe that because they covet something, it makes it right to just take it; and thus flout our laws and sovereignty, to the ultimate detriment of Americans and this great country. Moreover, Ms. Fabrizio, have you heard about the fiscal crisis in California, in no small part caused by illegal immigration, including the cost to control and mitigage damages from the gangs out here in L.A. land, from Mexico, El Salvador, etc. No, I guess not.
PS: By the way, I'm also Catholic.
jh | 1.13.10 @ 3:17PM
"Out here in So.Cal., young Mexican-Americans, and other so called hispanics, though able to perfectly speak English, always invariably revert to speaking Spanish among themselves in school or at work, etc.,"
Im my native Louisiana this was common among the French Cajuns and older Italians. They assimilated just fine in the long run
JmsA| 1.13.10 @ 3:47PM
I know some, though my work, so called hispanics that have lived in this country over 50 years, and can barely utter a cohesive sentence in English, let demonstrate any interest in the customs, language, and culture of this country. You have to live it, to believe it.
Respectfully;
JMSA
ShelK| 1.13.10 @ 3:23PM
There is great naivete among those who advocate for more, more, more immigration, also they often have a fiduciary interest.
What makes today's immigration from that of hte past is......SHEER NUMBERS and the OVER-ABUNDANCE of immigrants coming from ONE FEEDER NATION/CULTURE: Mexico and Latino nations of Central America. Immigration to the US in the past was of :
a) smaller numbers
b) legal
c) dispersed from many different "sending" countries and thus avoiding the problems of giving speical privaledge to Mexicans/latinos and thereby making the USA a bi-lingual, bi-cultural Balkinized nation.
Reduce all immigration, now.
Jose| 1.13.10 @ 3:44PM
We work hard Senor' (with your social security number). We not like lazy yanqui. We come here then bring our familia to re-populate your country, just like Mohammed come here with his mucho grande familia. The racist yanquiis too afraid to stop our migration. He will roll over and be surprised when we demand all of the Western Estados Unidos for Mexico.
ana maria phillips| 1.13.10 @ 4:15PM
WOW!!!! I cannot believe these comments. How sad. So devoid of love and compassion. Such a poor example of what being a Christian is about.
How can you hate your neighbor and in the next breathe say you love God.
Can you all be morally correct, but the Bishops a and the Pope are morally wrong? Pretty self-rightous
Margie| 1.13.10 @ 4:18PM
Yes, if the Bible is your standard and not Man.
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 1:22PM
No, if Christ founded his Church as opposed to writing a book. Remember the Ethiopian!
Margie| 1.15.10 @ 5:36PM
Like I said, if the Bible is your standard and not man. You should read it sometime. The Bible, that is.
"For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." 1 Ti. 2:5.
Teflon93 | 1.18.10 @ 10:02AM
I have read it multiple times and read it all the time, including the significant amounts of Sacred Scripture read verbatim at each Mass---one Old Testament reading, one Psalm, one Epistle, one Gospel reading, plus additional Scripture read by Father during homilies as the Spirit so moves.
Indeed, we must read Scripture in the proper context of that Church from whence it came, as even the Ethiopian knew, Margie (Acts 8):
30 And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest? 31 And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.
Indeed, those of you who follow pastors around from congregation to congregation are admitting as much. You are following Philip in trying to understand Scripture, wisely not wanting to be left to your own devices.
Reading about the sacraments of the Church is small beer to experiencing them. The sacraments are essential to growth in charity, Margie (cf. Luke 10):
30 And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. 31 And by chance there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he passed by on the other side. 32 And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side. 33 But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and when he saw him, he had compassion on him, 34 And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. 35 And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee. 36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves? 37 And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.
"Go, and do thou likewise."
We must remember that we have an obligation toward illegal immigrants to treat then with kindness, respect, and dignity. That does not mean we must rid ourselves of our laws. It does not mean we need take them into our households ourselves if not practicable--note the Samaritan delivered the robbed man to an inn and merely paid his bills. What it does mean is we must treat our brothers and sisters as we would ourselves.
Even if they're Catholic and you're not, Margie.
Margie| 1.18.10 @ 10:23PM
Right Teflon Don. And you show absolutely no vitriol and slander toward anyone not adhering to your false doctrine, right? Just assume on in your judgement of me as you wish. What I said is true.
Falling away from the Catholic Church does NOT mean falling away from Christ. It is false guilt that you promote along with that lie.
Falling away from Christ is what one ought to be concerned about. Not a Religion. Ever read about what Jesus thinks about Religion? He is only interested in religion as far as this~ "Religion that is pure and undefiled before God and the Father is this: to visit orphans and widows in their affliction, and to keep oneself unstained from the world." Jas. 1:27.
Do you keep yourself unstained from the world?
Teflon93 | 1.19.10 @ 3:30PM
Perhaps you might read a little further in that passage from St James, Margie:
13Let no man say when he is tempted, I am tempted of God: for God cannot be tempted with evil, neither tempteth he any man:
14But every man is tempted, when he is drawn away of his own lust, and enticed.
15Then when lust hath conceived, it bringeth forth sin: and sin, when it is finished, bringeth forth death.
16Do not err, my beloved brethren.
17Every good gift and every perfect gift is from above, and cometh down from the Father of lights, with whom is no variableness, neither shadow of turning.
18Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures.
19Wherefore, my beloved brethren, let every man be swift to hear, slow to speak, slow to wrath:
20For the wrath of man worketh not the righteousness of God.
21Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.
22But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.
23For if any be a hearer of the word, and not a doer, he is like unto a man beholding his natural face in a glass:
24For he beholdeth himself, and goeth his way, and straightway forgetteth what manner of man he was.
25But whoso looketh into the perfect law of liberty, and continueth therein, he being not a forgetful hearer, but a doer of the work, this man shall be blessed in his deed.
26If any man among you seem to be religious, and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain.
27Pure religion and undefiled before God and the Father is this, To visit the fatherless and widows in their affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world.
Given that the whole point of St James' epistle is that one must actively strive through good works to remain within the Church, you've missed the context. You'll also note that James addresses this to the "twelve tribes", meaning the twelve churches which comprised the Catholic Church, whose authority you invoke whenever you quote Sacred Scripture, given you by the Catholic Church as even Martin Luther noted:
"We are obliged to yield many things to the Catholics – (for example), that they possess the Word of God, which we received from them; otherwise, we should have known nothing at all about it." ---Martin Luther, Commentary on John, Chap 16.
And yes, Margie, thanks to the sacrament of reconciliation instituted by Christ I keep myself unstained from the world.
But do you visit orphans and widows in their affliction?
Margie| 1.19.10 @ 11:00PM
Jesus is Lord, not the Catholic Church. God gave man the Bible, not the Catholic Church. It has no authority over me, or anyone, rightfully, and never will. It is a lie. The Catholic Church persecuted Tyndale because he translated the Bible. It is a corrupt organization and has been from the beginning. Try as you may but God's truth cannot be changed by you, or any man.
And I will repeat: Falling away from the Catholic Church does not mean you have fallen away from God.
Always remember: "For there is one God, and there is one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus." 1 Tim. 2:5.
Teflon93 | 1.22.10 @ 8:39AM
Always remember, Margie, John 6:53:
53Jesus said to them, "I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
and Matthew 16:18:
18And I tell you that you are Peter,[a] and on this rock I will build my church, and the gates of Hades[b] will not overcome it.[c]
and Matthew 25:
37"Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?'
40"The King will reply, 'I tell you the truth, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers of mine, you did for me.'
And James 2:14:
14What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?
and 1 Cor 11:
26For as often as ye eat this bread, and drink this cup, ye do shew the Lord's death till he come.
27Wherefore whosoever shall eat this bread, and drink this cup of the Lord, unworthily, shall be guilty of the body and blood of the Lord.
28But let a man examine himself, and so let him eat of that bread, and drink of that cup.
29For he that eateth and drinketh unworthily, eateth and drinketh damnation to himself, not discerning the Lord's body.
and Acts 8:
30And Philip ran thither to him, and heard him read the prophet Esaias, and said, Understandest thou what thou readest?
31And he said, How can I, except some man should guide me? And he desired Philip that he would come up and sit with him.
And indeed all of Scripture, for Christ came to found a Church but not write a book, and the Bible is the history of the founding of that Church you in your ignorance do condemn.
You can ignore your inconsistencies only so long, Margie. Remember Christ's commandments!
Teflon93 | 1.22.10 @ 8:48AM
And to bail Margie out of bearing false witness (again), let's see what the Catechism has to say about Christ as mediator contra the Blessed Virgin, Christ's mother, who Margie continues to obliquely sneer at:
970 "Mary's function as mother of men in no way obscures or diminishes this unique mediation of Christ, but rather shows its power. But the Blessed Virgin's salutary influence on men . . . flows forth from the superabundance of the merits of Christ, rests on his mediation, depends entirely on it, and draws all its power from it." "No creature could ever be counted along with the Incarnate Word and Redeemer; but just as the priesthood of Christ is shared in various ways both by his ministers and the faithful, and as the one goodness of God is radiated in different ways among his creatures, so also the unique mediation of the Redeemer does not exclude but rather gives rise to a manifold cooperation which is but a sharing in this one source."
All roads lead to Christ. We Catholics love and respect Mary because Christ loves and respects Mary, even making provision for her care during his agony on the Cross (John 19):
26When Jesus therefore saw his mother, and the disciple standing by, whom he loved, he saith unto his mother, Woman, behold thy son!
27Then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home
Scripture says all generations shall call her blessed, Margie (Luke 1:48).
So why don't you?
I suspect it is because Mary was Catholic.
Eric Cartman| 1.13.10 @ 6:25PM
So it's love and compassion to have illegal aliens undermine our poor in wages, create ghettos and barrios, cause chaos at the borders, become prostitutes, criminals and be taken advantage of so you can have a cheap lawn boy? Your RX for this is what is harsh. These people need to get some balls, change their own governments and improve their own countries. Your ideas suck and lead to poverty and death, ahole! Don't start with your holier than thou bullshit!
Diane| 1.14.10 @ 9:40PM
Ed, Ed, please clean up your language. We hear enough of it on television. That is why I do not watch most channels. Eternal Word Television being one of my favorites. It has clean language.
Tony in Central PA| 1.13.10 @ 9:16PM
You have to admit, we have an immigration policy in this country that is absolutely insane. I recently talked to a woman MD from Britain who emigrated here with her husband ( Physics phD ). They had three children after emigrating. They are responsible, law - abiding, tax - paying contributors to their community and society at large. In short, you would think they are the kind of people our government would want as immigrants.
Apparently, not so. The woman was being threatened with deportation by the INS. She explained it to me, but I was not able to understand the reason for the INS threat. Fortunately, this was resolved after a year of wrangling and legal bills for the woman. I remembered telling her at the time to leave the country, enter illegally from Mexico and they'd never bother her again.
Diane| 1.13.10 @ 4:26PM
The truth is that everyone rants and raves about illegal immigrants unless they are of their own race, religion, ethnic group, political political, etc. then they convenietly look the other way, or do all they can to bring them over here legally. There are people coming over here illegally from every country in the world, including Canada, yet some would only point the finger at Latin America. Welcome to chaos, folks!
Margie| 1.13.10 @ 4:28PM
Typical Liberal lie: Make it about Race. Just like the author of this piece has.
It's not about Race. It's about the law.
Pingback| 1.13.10 @ 4:31PM
Twitter Trackbacks for The American Spectator : The Catholic Case for Immigration Re links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Diane| 1.13.10 @ 4:43PM
Regarding my last post, a lady who was legally here from India complained to me -- a white person of European descent whose American ancestors go way back to the 1600's on one side -- about people over here illegally. I just knew she was talking about Latin Americans or other non-East Indians. I wished I had asked her, "Which illegals do you mean?' At that time I had had another woman from India tell me that her nieces visa had expired, and she was still over here.
Simon Templar| 1.13.10 @ 5:10PM
Thank you Margie, succint and to the point. The Catholic church has lost its way from everything from homosexuality, global warming, illegal invasions, etc. Catholics were largely responsible for electing the most radical leftist to the highest office of our nation....or to be more correct and fair, American catholics... who do not want to keep in step with biblical teaching nor the directions of its leadership but rather would define their own seperate and unbiblical policy and religious belief. Many of these catholics will use classic liberal arguments and premises to justify their unbiblical positions. No, Diane, we all do not rant and rave and look the other way...most of our ancestors came here invited and legally through Ellis island and gave this country more than it took from it. Is it too much too ask that people follow the law and our government act reponsibily in dealing with these matters?
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 9:39AM
Wow, how could we ever mistake anti-Catholics for bigots?
For the record, I am a faithful Catholic and I would wager a man of the Right further to the Right than anyone else in this thread, presuming a general understanding of Burkean principle as elucidated particularly in his "Reflections on the Revolution in France" and which summed up so nicely the currents of the Founders' philosophy in the process.
As such, if forced to choose between the USCCB and Fabrizio's rather large stretch regarding open borders from their stated position and Pat Robertson's "Haiti made a pact with the Devil" response to the current disaster, I'm going with Fabrizio. I fail to see how anyone who's read the Bible or made any attempt to understand Christ could do otherwise.
And so long as the anti-Catholic "rant-and-ravers" hold up people like Robertson as models of Christian leadership---sorry, Charlie, but I don't see the Christ in you.
Beyond the polarities, I simply fail to see why we cannot support limited immigration prioritized on the basis of persecution, need (theirs AND ours), and likelihood to assimilate and continue to provide charitable aid in situ where this does not avail and still fulfill our Catholic calling. After all, would it not be better to have a stable and prosperous Haiti than to create a Haitian diaspora? Isn't that rather core to the cherished Catholic notion of subsidiarity so forgotten by Ms. Fabrizio above?
Margie| 1.15.10 @ 5:43PM
I doubt you'd see the Christian in anyone through your arrogance.
You hold well to your Religion but not to the Truth. I certainly see no Christian in you.
Teflon93 | 1.18.10 @ 10:12AM
Far from arrogance, Margie. I came late to what others came to early---the Church founded by Christ himself. And I did it only after trying everything else Protestant. Anything But Catholic.
I didn't find the Church; she found me. And I thank God she did!
My religion being the truth, I thank you kindly for your compliment.
As for your seeing "no Christian in me", well, I have only been Catholic a short time and will continue with God's grace toward sanctity. There is certainly Christ in me---I receive him at least weekly through the Holy Eucharist (John 6):
53Jesus said to them, “I tell you the truth, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you. 54Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day. 55For my flesh is real food and my blood is real drink. 56Whoever eats my flesh and drinks my blood remains in me, and I in him.
I can only take the Lord at his word and do as he bids me do, Sister Margie. The road of charity is long and hard, but harder if we refuse to step upon it, eh?
I don't fault Ms. Fabrizio for her call to charity---God knows we all need it. But I'm perplexed as to why she thinks that in order to be charitable toward our brothers and sisters in Mexico we must deny that same charity toward our brothers and sisters in the highlands of Vietnam, in Haiti, in China. Is she merely taking "neighbor" too literally?
jr| 1.13.10 @ 5:23PM
The "Church" long ago lost its way and started preaching socialism as well as becoming political. The Catholic church still has its arms open to those who practice, preach, and want to enact legislation for open abortion, e.g., Kennedy and Kerry, paid for by taxpayers.
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 9:47AM
The Church---love the scare quotes above, always a neon sign for Protestant tolerance---preached no such thing. As hard as it is for American Protestants to believe, the Catholic Church is not confined to the USCCB. You might recall a recent Pontiff who in fact put a stake in Communism's heart, or, if the pointy hat frightens you too much, recall Lech Walesa and Solidarity, which was a Catholic trade union and played a pivotal role in the same. You will find many pointed criticisms of Communist states and socialism itself as a totalitarian regime in encyclicals from the 19th century to the present should you care to look.
The Boston situation is clearly and sadly depicted in "The Faithful Departed"---recommend for anyone to read---but is clearly NOT a case which had the wider imprimatur of the Catholic Church. We take subsidiarity seriously; one must distinguish between the political philosophy of a bishop and the teachings of the Magisterium. Unlike in most Protestant communities, these are often different in the Catholic Church.
That said, the Church has ALWAYS been political. How could it not be? Christ created it for that reason, and from St Peter's day to this it has even been. It ever must be, for it is the light of Christ in the world, and contra the Fundamentalists who came around some 1,900 years too late for Penecost, it cannot be confined to hidden sanctuaries of true believers untroubled by contact with the sinners without.
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 10:09AM
And contra your position, this is the Catechism on socialism---not the last paragraph particularly and bear in mind the Catechism IS the definitive summary of the teachings of the Church, defining what faithful Catholics believe:
2423 The Church's social teaching proposes principles for reflection; it provides criteria for judgment; it gives guidelines for action:
Any system in which social relationships are determined entirely by economic factors is contrary to the nature of the human person and his acts.203
2424 A theory that makes profit the exclusive norm and ultimate end of economic activity is morally unacceptable. The disordered desire for money cannot but produce perverse effects. It is one of the causes of the many conflicts which disturb the social order.204
A system that "subordinates the basic rights of individuals and of groups to the collective organization of production" is contrary to human dignity.205 Every practice that reduces persons to nothing more than a means of profit enslaves man, leads to idolizing money, and contributes to the spread of atheism. "You cannot serve God and mammon."206
2425 The Church has rejected the totalitarian and atheistic ideologies associated in modem times with "communism" or "socialism." She has likewise refused to accept, in the practice of "capitalism," individualism and the absolute primacy of the law of the marketplace over human labor.207 Regulating the economy solely by centralized planning perverts the basis of social bonds; regulating it solely by the law of the marketplace fails social justice, for "there are many human needs which cannot be satisfied by the market."208 Reasonable regulation of the marketplace and economic initiatives, in keeping with a just hierarchy of values and a view to the common good, is to be commended.
John II| 1.14.10 @ 3:52PM
[Dramatic aside: Might as well get my two cents worth in, plus I can use this opportunity to excuse putting off the preparation of classes for another 20 minutes or so.]
The section of the Catechism (2425) quoted by Teflon93 should be enough to assure us all that the Roman Catholic Church is about as American as apple pie on matters economic. In her own development of understanding on the issue of the state's place in human affairs, the movement has been away from the mitre-and-crown arrangements of old toward the emerging democratic arrangements of the past few centuries, and a good case can be made for the notion that those evolved secular arrangements of governance owe their origins to Catholic-Christian moral teachings stretching all the way back to the Gospels.
In any event, the basic American view has always been that the state's proper function in a healthy economy is that of referee--a third party to whom the actors in the marketplace may turn when disputes inevitably arise. In other words, the state is neither the grand overseeing player in the game (socialism) nor an ineffectual kibitzer on the sidelines (extreme libertarianism--and I've never met anyone of that theoretical persuasion among the conservatives I know). That basic American view of proper economic arrangements is also the Church's view.
It's certainly true that some ignorant and possibly malevolent and certainly neurotic lefty clergy in the Church preach socialism. It's just as true that such clergy are heretics.
And now back to class preparation. At my age, still procrastinating. For shame.
bwn| 1.13.10 @ 5:33PM
It's a fool's errand and pointless to debate who are the "real Americans" and who are not. By definition Americans are those citizens either natively born here or naturalized through a legal immigration system.
A country must have laws and borders, else chaos entails. Those who choose to come here illegally or over-stay these visas are by definition, illegal aliens. The proper punishment for illegal immigration is to deport said illegal because it denies them what they desire - residence in the USA.
This should be applied to anyone here illegally, regardless of their ethnicity. It just so happens, Latinos make up nearly three-fourths of all illegal aliens. It is just the primary responsibility of the United States to welcome half the world's population. The majority of Americans now favor reducing legal immigration and an even higher percentage favor enforcing the law against illegal aliens.
Ask yourself liberals, why does Mexico harshly enforce it's borders and immigration laws?
Diane| 1.13.10 @ 6:34PM
Margie and Folks, I should not have used the word "everybody" in my first post. I have never brought anyone or anything over here illegally the few times I have been out of the country, and I am sure, or hope, that is the case with most Americans. When I was in my twenties, a long time ago, I did help a man from the Philipines get his American citizenship for the benefit of his family. I no longer get involved in bringing people here from other countries, either legally or illegally, but neither do I look in every nook and cranny of the country to report people who do. I just think we have to use common sense about the whole thing. Never-the-less, every person has been taught that "Charity begins at home" and it is not necessarily racist, but ethnocentric, to look after one's own people, which is normal. I was just trying to point out the hypocrisy of a lot of some Americans on the issue.
Norski| 1.13.10 @ 7:26PM
Per the US Bureau of Labor Statistics Unemployment Report of Jan. 8, 2010:
Construction and extraction occupations = 22.5% Unemployment
Farming, fishing, and forestry occupations = 21.8% Unemployment
Production occupations = 14.7% Unemployment
Transportation, material moving occupations = 12.2% Unemployment
Service occupations = 10.2% Unemployment
Total US Unemployed Citizens and Legal Residents = 15,267,000
The figures above exclude 6,306,000 Persons who want a job but are not included for various reasons.
Total Number of Americans Looking for Work = 21,573,000
Pew Study estimate of working Illegal Immigrants = 7,500,000
The majority work in agriculture, office and house cleaning, construction, and food preparation. Only in Agriculture does the number of working Illegal Immigrants exceed the number of unemployed Americans. But not by much.
Meanwhile Management, professional, and related occupations = 4.6% Unemployment
And if you compare the Pew Center list of the top ten states by estimated Illegal Immigrant population, the estimated percentage of working Illegal Immigrants is about half the unemployment rate or less in each state, showing that there is no individual state that would have a shortage of workers and a shrinking GDP without illegal immigration. Remember that GDP is a function of those who work, not those who get transfer payments such as unemployment and welfare.
This data shows how much Illegal Immigration has devastated US labor markets. Where is the outrage for the 7.5 million Citizens and Legal Residents who could be working but cannot find a job thanks to Illegal Immigrants? They have children and spouses. Why does no one supporting Illegal Immigration seem to care about all these American families being ripped apart by unemployment?
Diane| 1.13.10 @ 8:10PM
Sosa, you might be paying in taxes for other people's children, but they are paying in taxes, and/or other ways for the medical problems that come from the use of the birthcontrol pill and abortion -- such as more breast and other types of cancer in younger and younger women. The birthcontrol pill contributes to many types of medical problems, and the urine from women who use it pollutes the water and destroys fish.
Teflon93 | 1.13.10 @ 8:25PM
AMERICAN fish?
Diane| 1.13.10 @ 10:34PM
Yes, Teflong3, American fish and fish in other countries that use the birthcontrol pill have been found to be sexual deformed (intersex) from the estrogen in the pill. Denver, Colorado, is one of the places many of these fish are to be found. The major media kept it quiet for awhile since they are pro-abortion, pro-artificial contraception, but even they have finally included the birthcontrol pill among environment pollution. Just put "the birthcontrol pill and deformed fish" in your search engine, and there are websites with articles all about the issue.
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 9:51AM
Sorry, Diane, I was being arch. We're very America-focused in this thread, of course dead fish are dead fish the world over.
Ms Fabrizio is likewise very Mexico-focused; I'd like to know what we do about dead fish the world over, in other words, the Church being a global one.
And yes, I'm an NFPer myself and hope more people give "Humanae Vitae" a read as well as the latest scientific findings as to the hazards of showering the world with artificial estrogen you've highlighted.
But of course they'll call us eco-commies!
Diane| 1.14.10 @ 3:16PM
Apology accepted, Teflong. They are trying to find ways to get the estrogen out of the sewage water that pollutes the streams, etc. Now they need to work on teaching people such methods as the Sympto-thermo Natural Family Planning so woman do not get all the harmful medical problems from the Pill. All of us need to be more responsible ourselves too. As far as being an eco-commie, I was raised with the old English adage, "Waste not, want not." I am way ahead of them on the environment and cannot understand why some are just making all the fuss now. By the way, I think all this global warming is just nonsense, even though we do have to recycle and find other sources for energy, but there are not any sources that do not cause some type of problem one way or another. So I really do not worry too much about it. Al Gore uses more jet fuel than I do, and years ago some scientists told us we would have another ice age. Go figure!
Fr. Michael| 1.13.10 @ 8:55PM
I don't believe the USCCB, nor do I believe that their motives are Catholic. After all, if what they were saying was true, why wouldn't Vatican City State live by the same immigration reform. As a Catholic priest, I call upon our Catholic Bishops to have Rome show us, the United States, by example, how we should treat immigrants. Until the USCCB calls upon Vatican City State to live by these Catholic principles, they are not in any position to tell our country how we should live.
Teflon93 | 1.13.10 @ 9:39PM
Father, are you denying the authority of the bishops?
Fr. Michael| 1.14.10 @ 10:12AM
No, I am not denying their authority on faith or morals; as I pointed out, their current policy for immigration is contrary to Vatican City State policy, therefore, if the Church's Vatican City State immigration policy is different than what they are encouraging the U.S. to follow, it can't be a moral issue or issue of teaching authority. Before they take the splinter out of our eye, they need to take the plank out of their own!
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 1:21PM
Father-
Thank you for clarifying, and as noted above, I share this particular sentiment.
There is a question as to where the intersection of the bishop's authority in faith and morals and in politics and law; we conservatives have to be careful not to push one line for abortion (a predominant issue to be sure) and another for immigration (though a subordinate issue). Do we demand the bishops in the public square on the former and banish them on the latter?
I do think we need to remind the bishops prone to going well beyond Church teaching on the subject that subsidiarity does not imply dioceses as proliferating popedoms. Charity, si, elimination of national borders, no!
Diane| 1.14.10 @ 6:51PM
A very good and sensible post, Teflong.
Luci| 6.7.10 @ 3:11AM
Well said.
John Rice| 1.13.10 @ 9:32PM
There is no place for illegal aliens in our country.
Teflon93 | 1.13.10 @ 9:38PM
John, as an historical test, would you therefore agree with FDR's refusal to accept the Jewish refugees aboard the MS "St Louis" in 1939 on immigration grounds?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MS_St._Louis
MikeBee| 1.13.10 @ 9:59PM
Point #1: We need to concentrate on the root of the immigration problem. The root of the problem is the communist/socialist government of Mexico, which, like all communist/socialist governments eventually, is unable to provide for its citizens. People come to the U.S. from Mexico because they are starving, need work, and seek a better life for themselves. The official United States policy with regard to Mexican immigration should be FIRST, to bring great pressure on the Mexican government to be a free society, and to embrace the principles of freedom, not communism.
Point #2: The Catholic Church says that we should take care of the poor. That is absolutely correct. However, I, for one, do not believe that this should be done by the government. When the citizens of this country are forced to take care of the poor by government fiat, this is not a virtuous act. Virtue always comes from freedom.
When a woman is raped, the Catholic Church always counsels her that she has NOT committed any sin, as she was not free. The act of rape was forced upon her. The same principle applied in determining a sinful act is also true of any virtuous act. In order for there to be virtue in a good act, the act must be freely performed. Taking people's money by government fiat to feed the poor is not a virtuous act. People deciding on their own to give some money to help the poor does constitute a virtuous act.
The people in the U.S. are the most generous (and virtuous) people in the world. More than any other country, we give our money to the poor, freely. The Catholic Church should help poor immigrants, and U.S. citizens should feel free to aid them, as well, by giving money and resources. But, no government should force citizens to give to the poor.
Diane| 1.13.10 @ 10:38PM
Mike Bee, you bring out some excellent points.
Diane| 1.13.10 @ 10:40PM
But so did Teflong3 to John Rice about "the ship of the damned".
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 9:08AM
"No government should force citizens to give to the poor" nicely exposes the faultline of Fabrizio's argument and the USCCB's position: coercion. The Church views charity as an individual rather than a collective responsibility in that each of us is called to charity. Moreover, charity is a sign of the inward grace of God---an important one. Forced charity is a repulsive contradiction of the Church's understanding of the cardinal virtues in this light.
Fabrizio recognizes this---see the last line of her article. I'm not as sure that the USCCB has this truth front-and-center, though.
Christ did not coerce the rich man--he merely exposed his materialism, that which was holding him back from the true holiness he claimed to seek. He did much the same with those who wanted to stone the adultress to death---they claimed justice and righteousness; they in fact sought vengeance and therefore risked the Lord's in turn.
Surely, we must be merciful and charitable. And Americans are both, moreso than any other people in history I'd warrant. But just as the Church does not require every member of the faithful to fill their homes with the teeming poor until all is consumed down to the foundation, neither are nations required to invoke their own extinction by absorbing other nations whole within. Can you imagine the havoc and misery that would cause the world over?
I have not in this thread seen adequate response to another criticism of Fabrizio's article: why are the Mexican people to be elevated over the poor and persecuted of the rest of the world? Why should Mexico be able to send all of their poor northward and the persecuted Catholics of Vietnam not be allowed to do the same eastward?
I would like to see that answer.
Diane| 1.14.10 @ 7:07PM
As a native California, Teflong, and one whose step-father was of Spanish descent and who married into a partially Mexican family, I must admit that I favor the Mexican people and Latin Americans. They are also our neighbors, and California was at one time under Spanish rule and then Mexican. Let's face it. The state was taken from the American Indians, then the Spanish. then the Mexicans, and now there are so many languages spoken here it is sometimes chaotic, especially in the schools. One time I called a business and got spoken to in three or four languages. I told a friend, "English I know. Spanish I am familiar with, but what the heck were the other languages." To put it humorously, "The state has been passed around quite a few times." No wonder we are broke.
Diane| 1.14.10 @ 7:47PM
Of course, I was doing a lot of joking in my last post to ease some of the tension. Something I should add is that many of the Californian Indians converted to the Church and many have intermarried with the people of Mexican and Anglo descent, so it matters not who took the state from whom now.
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 8:46PM
A fair point, but one which I presume would obligate Spain even more than America, Spain having sent the Conquistadores.
Of course, we must then consider that modern-day Italians have much to answer for, given the depradations the Romans visited upon much of the world in building their empire.
As soon as we start down the blood guilt path, the problem is there is no stopping. So wise is the Church in eschewing that for personal accountability!
Race as you've noted is also a slippery thing. Many of the commenters in this thread, myself included, refer to "Mexicans" irrespective of the distinctions the people of Mexico themselves make among those of the various aboriginal ethnicities, Spanish, and everything in-between. But then I'm Portuguese and we were considered to be bona fide "brown people" until we magically became "white" sometime in the late 20th century. Jury's still out on whether we're Hispanic but that being a figment of Nixon's administration the point is moot but at census time.
And when you get right down to it, if race is that slippery, and historical grievances even slipperier, aren't we down to allowing immigration based on geographic accident or current economic status at present?
Why not let more Portuguese in? We're Catholic too and the food is phenomenal.....
John Doyle| 1.13.10 @ 11:30PM
People, the hatred and resentment on these comments is shameful.
As a Catholic the position of our Church on immigration is one of the reasons I am proud to be Catholic. Our Church is respected by conservatives for our principled, life-center stand on abortion, but then denigrated for a principled stand on immigration which respects the God-given dignity of each man, including that of immigrants.
Now, on the issue of the economy, if we want to rebuild our middle class we must close the trap door on the wage floor of our economy that the current situation has created. The way to do this is through earned legalization, as our Bishops suggest. This country is deporting some 400,000 people a year, destroying the families of many, many good people. Not something for conservatives to be proud of. Even at this rate it will take another 30 plus years to deport the illegal workers who are here - an obvious impossibility.
So our Bishops are both moral and practical, and they make me proud to be Catholic.
Lisa Fabrizio| 1.14.10 @ 1:43AM
John Doyle: And I am proud to be your fellow member in the Body of Christ!
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 9:14AM
I am a faithful Catholic myself.
Why do you privilege our Mexican brothers and sisters over those elsewhere in the world, such as the Montagnards of my own parish?
Are they not our brothers and sisters too?
What of those from Africa, war-torn and impoverished in a way even Mexico has never been? Where shall these people go?
What of the Chinese Christians, brutally repressed by the regime in periodic purges? What of the Falun Gong, Christians not but our brothers and sisters still, as even the Good Samaritan was?
Where shall they go?
Why do you favor some over others?
Haiti, now devastated, has enormous numbers of Catholics. Where shall they go?
Eric Cartman| 1.14.10 @ 2:36PM
Well, John, these people shouldn't have come here illegally in the first place. Too bad their "families" are broken up - so are the families of people who break other laws. Too fucking bad! You and your pals want to pay for them to relocate peacefully BACK to their own third-world crap-hole, do so. Otherwise, round them up and send them back via catapult if we have to. Really, John, go blubber over their bad luck to someone else.
Diane| 1.14.10 @ 11:50PM
Eric, I am going to get a bar of soap for your mouth. I am sure your mother would agree.
Pingback| 1.14.10 @ 12:05AM
The American Spectator : The Catholic Case for Immigration Reform USA Cws links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Yosemeti Sam| 1.14.10 @ 1:55AM
" ... Throughout her history, many representatives of the Church have erred gravely ...."
Brother Sun Sister Moon!
Pingback| 1.14.10 @ 2:31AM
The American Spectator : The Catholic Case for Immigration Reform Staff links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
DM| 1.14.10 @ 4:24AM
No sale, Ms. Fabrizio.
If the Church wants to assume all responsibility for these folks -- all their health and education costs, all the costs of teaching them English and so on, they're welcome to do so. But forcing me to pay for these people, as is essentially the case when they use the health and school systems, how is that different from the government forcing me to support people on welfare?
If the clergy are so concerned about these people, why don't they move to the impoverished nations where these folks are fleeing from and agitate for change there? Wouldn't that be a more effective use of their time and benefit far more people in the long run? What of all those who didn't or couldn't make the trip -- are the clergy concerned about them?
There are literally billions of people who would be materially better off if they could live like Americans -- and many could, at home, if they fixed their own countries.
I do resent my culture being turned upside down, the crime, the disease and my language being just another choice on the voicemail menu. Call me anything you like. I want them gone, and the bishops can follow them, if they like.
And I don't believe that there is absolutely no connection between the clergy's position on immigration and church attendance. The clergy can be just as political as anyone else.
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 9:23AM
You're missing the point. In the Catholic Church, as opposed to the various Protestant communities, church attendance does not equal more money for the parish or diocese. The reason for this is that the Catholic Church does considerably more charitable works than Protestant communities do and does them worldwide. 1st generation immigrants in our Church overwhelmingly are consumers of Church resources, not contributors. It is true that in subsequent generations this does tend to even out, but other trends overwhelm this (look at all the empty Catholic sanctuaries in the northeastern U.S.---Portuguese and Italian immigration didn't save these!
An anecdote might help you appreciate the different way Catholics view this:
While Archbishop Fulton Sheen was retired ill, a young priest approached him, enthusiastically recounting how many souls he had saved for the Church and inquiring as to what to do next. "The first thing to do," Archbishop Sheen said, rising, "is to stop counting."
Catholic concern for immigrants is indistinguishable from our concern for the poor and downtrodden whom we are called to care for. That is understandable.
My concern is when Catholics go well beyond the Catechism and elevate this legitimate and necessary concern above all others, including the security of the state.
It does us little good to shuffle the poor around the world like locusts leaving behind them failed states and gutted economies.
It is not a matter of the will to absorb millions of refugees each year, but the ability. For when America goes, where will they go THEN?
Inge| 1.14.10 @ 5:20AM
Before I opine on this article, I do not mean in any way to insult, or question any motives by comments here, although I have several issues with this article:
The Ten Commandments state clearly "Thou shall have no other Gods besides me"! Why is it, that the catholic church considers the pope 'Holy'? No earthlt human is holy, therefore it's a false worship!
Secondly, the catholic church always has been a political hub thoughout history. It is named in the Bible as 'the roman empire', and those who know the Bible will agree, that much evil has been done in the name of the catholic church. It was the roman empire who destroyed the Temple in Jerusalem twice!
The catholic church also was part of forming the European Union, and we can see that the purpose is to re-establish once again the roman empire.
During Hitler's rain, the pope worked with Hitler, and we know how that ended.
Politics is a taboo, or it should be for any church. Their sole responsibility should be to teach God's Word.
When you break one commandment, you violate them all, and that includes the issue of illegal immigration.
I do not doubt that people who are catholic are sincere in their belief, and mean well, but being misled.
Politics, and the catholic church does not mix well, and should never be an issue.
People worship the pope, which again is false idol worship.
To support illegal immigration is another stain. Churches suppose to teach, not appeal to the vulnerable in supporting that of which is breaking the law.
Anyone who reads the Bible knows that we are currently witnessing the establishment again of the 3rd roman empire. The result of that is described in revelation, no addional commment needed. Go, and read the Bible; current attempts by the catholic church to resurrect their influence in world affairs is on its way, and it won't be pretty.
Diane| 1.14.10 @ 7:42PM
Inge, I am sorry to say that your post is full of a lot of errors which are impossible to correct is such limited space. In the first place if you know the Old Testament well, King David knelt before Samuel the Prophet when Samuel anoited him king. He was showing respect (the old English word was worship, as opposed to adoration which was given to God alone) for Samuel as a Prophet of God. Later the people of Israel knelt before King David and other Israelite kings, thereby showing their respect for the King as a representative of the Lord. The homage paid to the pope is nothing more than King David did for Samuel and the Israelites did for King David. Catholics kneel before the Pope in respect for his office as head of Christ's Church. It is not non-Biblical. Many Americans, including myself on my maternal side, are descendants of some of the Puritans, who were, quite frankly, not very humble people. A lack of humility is a puritanical trait, which in itself is not very Biblical, but I will not get into that any further. Also, the Holy Roman Empire was a Christian empire not a pagan one as was the Roman Empire. There was quite a difference.
amberdru| 1.14.10 @ 7:47AM
Living in the U.S. is not a human right.
Do the Imam's and Ayatollah's get to determine policy and what my rights are too?
amberdru| 1.14.10 @ 7:57AM
Race Riots Grip Italian Town, and Mafia Is Suspected
ROME — More than a thousand African workers were put aboard buses and trains in the southern Italian region of Calabria over the weekend and shipped out to immigrant detention centers, following some of the country’s worst riots in years.
The clashes began Thursday night in Rosarno, a working-class city amid citrus groves in Calabria, the toe of Italy’s boot, after a legal immigrant from Togo was lightly wounded in a pellet-gun attack in a nearby city. It is not clear who pulled the trigger — the authorities said they were investigating whether organized crime had provoked the riots — but the consequences were severe.
Blaming racism for the attack, dozens of immigrants burned cars and smashed shop windows in Rosarno in two days of riots, throwing rocks at local residents and fighting with the police. More than 50 immigrants and police officers were wounded, none seriously, and 10 immigrants and locals were arrested before the authorities began sending the immigrants to detention centers elsewhere in southern Italy on Saturday.
The images emerging from Calabria over the weekend — of torched cars and angry African immigrants hurling rocks — were the most vivid example of the growing racial tensions in Italy, which have been exacerbated by an economic crisis whose depth has only recently been acknowledged in the national dialogue. Both the official and underground economies increasingly rely on immigrants, while Italy remains torn between acceptance and xenophobia.
The riots also shone a bright light on a side of the country rarely seen in tourist itineraries. On Sunday, the authorities began bulldozing the makeshift encampments outside Rosarno where hundreds of immigrants live in what human rights groups describe as subhuman conditions. They are often paid less than $30 a day picking fruit, a job that many Italians see as beneath them. Organized crime syndicates are known to have a strong grip on every level of the Calabrian economy.
“This event pulled the lid off something that we who work in the sector know well but no one talks about: That many Italian economic realities are based on the exploitation of low-cost foreign labor, living in subhuman conditions, without human rights,” said Flavio Di Giacomo, the spokesman for the International Organization for Migration in Italy.
The workers live in “semi-slavery,” added Mr. Di Giacomo, who said, “It’s shameful that this is happening in the heart of Italy.”
Pope Benedict XVI veered from his prepared remarks in his Angelus message on Sunday to denounce the violence in Calabria. “An immigrant is a human being, different in origin, culture and tradition, but he is a person to respect, with rights and duties,” the pope said. He also criticized the “exploitation” of immigrants.
It was not entirely clear if all the immigrants left willingly for the detention centers, or if some were forced to leave. In a reconstruction of the days of violence, the police said they were protecting the immigrants against would-be assailants, at least one of whom brandished a pistol.
Some immigrants told the Italian news media that Calabrians had shot at them and beaten them with sticks in the riots, and a front-page editorial in La Repubblica on Sunday compared the situation to Ku Klux Klan violence in the United States in the 1960s. But other news reports said that many immigrants had fled their encampments in haste before the police began clearing them with bulldozers.
Not all immigrants appear to have left the city, but those who are in the immigration centers with regular residence permits, or who had requested political asylum, are free to go, the interior minister, Roberto Maroni, said Sunday in a television interview. The others, he said, will be identified and deported.
The riots in Rosarno were a rare instance in which an entire city was engulfed by immigrant violence. In September 2008, Italy sent 400 members of the National Guard to Castelvolturno, outside Naples, after violent protests broke out over the shooting deaths of six African immigrants in clashes with the Camorra, the Neapolitan Mafia. Last February, immigrants set fire to the detention center on the island of Lampedusa, where many had been held awaiting deportation.
There are 4 million legal immigrants in Italy, out of a population of 60 million, and even more illegal immigrants. And while many Italians rely on them to work in their businesses and take care of their young children or elderly parents, many Italians see the new arrivals as a threat.
In television interviews, some Rosarno residents said they had lived peacefully alongside the immigrants and tried to give them work and food. But others were more hostile. “We’ve put up with them for 20 years,” one man shouted in a television interview on Sky TG24.
In recent years, the center-right government of Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi has issued strong anti-immigrant statements. Mr. Berlusconi, who is recovering after being struck in the face with a statuette of the Milan cathedral by a mentally unstable man last month, has not commented on the riots.
But in his interview on Sunday, the interior minister, Mr. Maroni, called the situation in Rosarno “the fruit of the wrong kind of tolerance.” The day before, he had been quoted as saying the riots were the fruit of “too much tolerance.”
A member of the powerful Northern League Party, known for its anti-immigrant language, Mr. Maroni also defended a proposal introduced by his party last week to cap the number of immigrant students in public school classes at 30 percent. “Sometimes they speak different languages, and there’s no common balance in the classroom,” Mr. Maroni said.
Human rights groups say that many African immigrants come to Italy with what appear to be legal offers of work in the agricultural sector in the south, often by paying middlemen more than $10,000 for the opportunity. When they arrive, the rights groups say, the immigrants often find that the agricultural outfits refuse to honor their end of the bargain, instead compelling the migrants to work under the table at wages far below the legal minimum wage. Often, the outfits that hire them have links to organized crime.
Mr. Maroni has said in the past that the ’Ndrangheta, or Calabrian Mafia, is the most powerful organized crime group in Italy because its members are bound by strong blood ties, making it difficult to cultivate informants. Last week, two bombs were found at the main courthouse in Reggio Calabria, in what was widely seen as a message by the ’Ndrangheta to prosecutors trying to dismantle clans.
Mr. Maroni also said that the notion that the ’Ndrangheta had provoked the riots was “one possible hypothesis” that the authorities were examining.
In an interview in La Repubblica on Saturday, Roberto Saviano, the author of the bestseller “Gomorrah,” about organized crime near Naples, called the immigrants in Rosarno courageous. “Immigrants are always braver than we are against the clans,” Mr. Saviano said.
La Realidad| 1.14.10 @ 9:47AM
From a faithful Catholic perspective this is a good article Ms. Fabrizio. You wrote this article knowing that this reader base will crucify you for your comments but that is to be expected. The Church has been working at the parish level to support all those in need (poor, immigrant, etc.) and doesn't close Her doors to anyone despite the ignorant rants found here and elsewhere. For those who would like another perspective outside of this article and the ridiculous anti-Catholic and xenophobic postings here, please look at this website for another perspective. Its prudent to understand one's viewpoint rather than spewing out false claims and accusations.
http://www.dolr.org/bishop/iwa.....letter.php
Norski| 1.14.10 @ 12:51PM
Why do you label those who disagree with you as speaking "ignorant rants” or guilty of crucifixion? You are so judgmental.
The Bible says: "Why do you look at the speck that is in your brother's eye, but do not notice the log that is in your own eye? Or how can you say to your brother, 'Brother, let me take out the speck that is in your eye,' when you yourself do not see the log that is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take out the speck that is in your brother's eye. For there is no good tree which produces bad fruit, nor, on the other hand, a bad tree which produces good fruit. For each tree is known by its own fruit. For men do not gather figs from thorns, nor do they pick grapes from a briar bush. The good man out of the good treasure of his heart brings forth what is good; and the evil man out of the evil treasure brings forth what is evil; for his mouth speaks from that which fills his heart.”
Yet you contend those who speak truthfully about those who engage in law-breaking behavior including Illegal Entry, Illegal Presence, Identity Fraud, Identity Theft, coveting a neighbor’s property, and bearing false witness as "anti-Catholic and xenophobic".
Does the bad tree now somehow produce good fruit?
Adheeb| 1.14.10 @ 12:44PM
The Bible teaches Christians are to obey the law of the land. When Jesus told Peter to 'feed my sheep' he was talking to Peter (the Church), not the civil government. It is the responsibility of the church to nurish the flock, not push its responsibility onto the civil government.
Joe Biden is a good example of the twisted thinking we see among those desiring a liberal immigration policy. According to his financial record released during the 2008 election, Biden donanted about $1,000 to charity over the course of ten years. That about $100/ year, or two bucks a week. Yet, Joe is very happy to take his neighbors tax money to 'help' the poor and impoverished ... who knows, maybe they'll vote for him next time.
Joe B| 1.14.10 @ 12:45PM
I notice Mother Theresa cared for the poor of Calcutta in Calcutta. She didn't open a law office and advise the poor on how to move to Britain.
mejamom| 1.14.10 @ 2:00PM
Being humane and comprehensive at the same time is not going to work with this issue. Immigrants, illegal or legal are getting and going to get hurt one way or another. I agree that the US has enough problems without adding millions of extra poor,uneducated,etc. to our ranks. I don't have an answer.
However, I don't understand (unless I missed something or need to read more) why some of the posters think that the USCCB will have enough influence to cause us to be forced into charitible giving, via taxes. Afterall, no group from the Catholic Church or any religious denomination, has been sucessful in overturning Roe vs Wade.
John II| 1.14.10 @ 4:17PM
Anybody there? Whew. Okay, looks as if I may be able to get the last word in; things have been pretty quiet awhile.
Lisa, this is for you. I liked your piece in a general way, but it was only generally written--and you have to admit you stirred up a bee's nest. I would hope that you're not content to tip-toe away to another topic after the swarm, with no more than a quickie thanks to an isolated supporter.
Most of the many responses to your piece are contrary, but only a few are downright hostile, and quite a few (from such as Teflon96) are concrete, well spoken, and deserving. I mean, they deserve a response from you.
In short, and as a fellow Catholic probably about twice your age, I hope you won't be offended if I suggest: You got some 'splainin' to do, woman.
Eric Cartman| 1.14.10 @ 11:20PM
John,
The reason that so many are hostile to to Ms. Fabrizio is that people like her and George Bush and the WSJ and apparently this magazine don't seem to get it: We meant NO! when we said NO! a couple of years ago! We are sick and tired of hearing the same poor argument for allowing Mexico get away with using this country as a dumping ground for their problems. People on welfare will do these jobs if we quit paying them to sit around while illegals hold down wages and exhaust our social services. STOP making excuses, STOP subsidizing illegal activity, STOP allowing millions of third-world people come here to lower our living standard, which these policies do. My wife came here from the Philippines LEGALLY! It has cost us dearly in money, heartache and worry (the INS once threatening to deport her because we did not submit 1 -that's ONE - form our of the thousands of forms they demand). So, Ms. Fabrizio, don't expect ANY sympathy from me. They DO NOT belong here, period!
Diane| 1.14.10 @ 11:53PM
Now, Ed, you are making some good points in clean language.
Eric Cartman| 1.15.10 @ 12:58PM
Diane,
I'm sorry for the language. I usually do not cuss in front of ladies. But these people have rubbed my nerves raw with this subject - and apparently a lot more than me . NO means NO, Ms. Fabrizio!
Penguins Fan| 1.14.10 @ 8:22PM
Once I started reading this article, I expected some invective. I did not expect so much.
The USA's Anglo-Saxon heritage of racial superiority, dating back to colonial days, led to slavery and the Jim Crow laws that followed, as well as the Know-Nothings and the gool ol' standy, the KKK, which in its heyday hated Catholics, Jews and blacks with equal vitriol.
Wanna know why so many so-called Catholics are Democrat and always have been? Check out the history of James Blaine. Many states have a "Blaine Amendment" in their constitutions forbidding as much as a dime of state tax money going to a parochial school, thanks to Blaine and his merry bunch of anti-Catholics in the late 19th century.
With that out of the way....the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops is...a joke at best and a loony bin most of the time. the fraud that is the Catholic Campaign for Human Development has been exposed here and elsewhere and the USCCB was...quite embarrassed.
For far too long, the USCCB, as a body, has operated as an adjunct of the Democrat Party. They have favored government expansion of spcial spendign at every turn and have been only too willing to accept money from Uncle Sam for their own charities. In turn, collections from the pew have dropped off. There's a catch. Uncle Sam attaches strings to the money so Catholic Charities in certain states finds itself required to place children for adoption with gay couples, or has to provide contraception coverage to its employees.
Stupid is as stupid does.
Look at the priest sex abuse scandal. It wasn't the bishops who paid. It was the dwindling faithful in the pews...whose hard earned money that paid the insurance policies, who paid the settlements, who paid for the church and school buildings....they paid for the malfeasance of the bishops.
Who suffered? The abused and the faithful. Meanwhile, bishops like Mahony go merrily along.
For over 50 years, the majority of bishops have provided for lousy priest formation in the seminaries. Often, seminary operations were turned over to feminist nuns who sought to fill the priesthood with men who would do what they were told. Michael Rose's book, Goodbye, Good Men documents this well.
For decades, the USCCB would issue platitudes about the evil of abortion but until Archbishop Burke decided to take on the establishment when he was bishop of LaCrosse, Wisconsin, it was largely silence from the bishops - and still is.
Look at how the USCCB has long supported "national health care" and how some of them foolishly believe that the Democrat Party won't ram abortion and contraception down everyone's throats with this monstrosity.
A few years ago, the USCCB and the Mexican bishops' conference issued a joint statement affirming the "unlimited right to emigrate".
Then the Vatican bemoans the Copenhagen meeting failure to come to a "climate change accord", when it is acknowledged that "climate change" is a fraud.
It is no wonder the USCCB has absolutely no credibility with so many Americans, and why so many people have left the Catholic Church, be it for some religious denomination or just for abandoning all faith.
As a Catholic who is a daily communicant, I am often amazed by their blunders.
Catholics in the United States - and elsewhere - have an obligation to assist the poor regardless of where they live. What we do not have an obligation to do is to direct American taxpayer money to subsidize poverty. what I mean by that is that as long as the US accepts droves of poor from Latin America, those governments have no incentive to improve their nations.
Much of the Western Hamishpere was Catholic by the end of the 17th century. Catholics here here long before Jamestown or Plymouth. Santa Fe (Holy Faith) New Mexico is older than either Jamestown or Plymouth and St. Augustine, Florida is older than Santa Fe. Fray Junipero Serra evangelized California at the same time the War for Independence was being fought.
A then-Catholic France - and a then-Catholic Spain both assisted the Continental Army in the War for Independence against King George. The role of the Spanish is almost always omitted in American history textbooks.
Catholic immigrants came to the USA and built churches, schools, hospitals, orphanages, colleges and universities, funded and operated them.
Adoption of Big Government social policies has caused the Catholic Church to lose its way in the US.
There isn't a single Catholic charity that should accept as much as a dime of US taxpayer money. It ought to come from Catholics.
Catholics in the USA have an obligation to help poor people in Latin America. That doesn't mean throwing the welcome mat out for all of them.
The US government is broke, deep in debt and the US taxpayer is tapped out. Yet, the USCCB which Mencken referred to as the Democrat Party at prayer, fails to recognize it.
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 8:55PM
Ahem---the KKK were DEMOCRATS. You might recall it was the Democrats which supported slavery up through (and beyond) the Civil War. It was the Democrats who brought us Jim Crow (the Republicans during Reconstruction actually enforced the Constitutional amendments enfranchising blacks; there were black congressmen from the South in the late 1800s as a result). The KKK was started by Confederate general Nathan Bedford Forrest in reaction to what Republicans had done on behalf of southern blacks.
Catholics tend toward being Democrats because it was the Democrats who organized the Northern ghettos where many Catholic immigrants lived. Voting habits die hard. As the John Paul II generation takes over the Church, hopefully American Catholics will respond to the teaching of the bishops and take a fresh view.
And Mencken wrote about that nearly 100 years ago.
Diane| 1.15.10 @ 12:07AM
Wow! Penquins Fan, do you know your history. The only thing you left out is that the very name America comes from Amerigo Vespucci, the Florentine explorer, a Catholic.
albert constantine, jr.| 1.14.10 @ 8:36PM
An associate of mine in law enforcement once opined that if everytime we encountered an illegal alien from Mexico, we sent an American-born welfare recipient to Mexico City, that Mexico would build a border wall before too long. If one legally wishes to immigrate to the US, sponsors must first sign affidavits of support, guaranteeing that the immigrant will not be a public charge. Prior to any legalization of status for those who have already arrived illegally, reimbursement for any taxpayer benefits or costs already stolen, as well as forfeiture of any benefits fraudulently obtained (such as credit to a Social Security account) and denial of citizenship (as opposed to resident status, which does not make chain migration as easy) need to be imposed, along with any token fines and English requirements the last amnesty proposals so lamely proposed.
Charles R. Williams| 1.14.10 @ 8:48PM
There is a confusion here between justice and charity. Certainly, Christians are called to be generous with the poor, including poor immigrants. Allowing illegal immigrants to remain in this country is another matter. First, illegal immigrants are not entitled to the presumption that they are economic refugees. Second, immigration of low-skilled legal and illegal immigrants makes it more difficult to sustain an economy where workers can receive a just wage and other requirements for a minimally decent life. It is a matter of trade offs, that is, a matter of prudential judgment, where the American bishops have no special competance. As it stands, the level and quality of legal immigration in this country is incompatible with achieving a just society.
It is not reasonable to expect charity workers to turn in people who might be illegals who show up asking for help. Especially since the INS will do nothing about these reports anyway. It would be a very simple matter to develop systems to allow employers to verify the immigration status of potential workers. This is the answer.
And then there is the issue of largely Catholic Mexico and its economic policies which drive people to destitution.
Teflon93 | 1.14.10 @ 8:59PM
Charles, I hope the last line isn't meant to imply Mexico is poor because it is Catholic. It would be more accurate to say it is Catholic because it is poor.
John II| 1.15.10 @ 10:12PM
And it's poor because it is now and always has been hopelessly corrupt. Geographically, the country itself is fabulously rich in mineral resources and arable land and stunning vistas. But it's run mostly by criminals and wannabe caudillos and fatuous intellectuals--abetted by chic snots from abroad.
Teflon93 | 1.16.10 @ 2:28PM
Indeed it is, John---a situation we're making worse by alleviating the responsibilities of Mexicans to care for their own poor by allowing them to export their most disadvantaged. The Mexican leaders tend to be Catholic too---have they no responsibility to the poor within their own borders?
Not so incidentally, Mexico is infamous for intolerantly treating immigrants from the south. They do not want to import impoverished people from Central America.
Charles R. Williams| 1.17.10 @ 10:52PM
Mexico is not poor because it is Catholic. But the Mexican bishops should have more leverage in getting the Mexican government to adopt policies that would make Mexico prosperous than the American bishops have in convincing us to adopt policies that would ultimately destroy our country.
Part of the problem is that Catholic bishops are just not very knowledgeable about economics and tend to view government policy from the point of view of charity in a way that ignores the broader consequences of what they propose.
Teflon93 | 1.18.10 @ 10:15AM
Here, here, Charles!
I can't think of any Vatican economists off the top of my head but perhaps it is hard to embrace "the dismal science" when surrounded by Renaissance masters....
I'm not sure the American bishops are embracing open borders---I maintain that Ms. Fabrizio is stretching mightily there but am prepared to be corrected on that score.
Ark Ashamed of Bill| 1.15.10 @ 8:45AM
“Immigration reform” is simply left-speak for erasing the American identity through ethnic dilution, and no American conservative should defend it. The Roman Church is part of the Religous Left heresy, which cherry-picks the scriptures for justifications to advance socalism. In this instance they have shoved the part in Romans about objeying the civil authorities down the Memory Hole. The bishops should be preaching this to the illegals rather than encouraging them to break American laws intended to protect the American people, all the while taking full advantage of the laws that forbid patriotic Americans from, say, burning down Roman churches. This sort of moral cowardice is a staple of the Left. It should be needless to say that the concept of obeying American law is an alien concept to the bishops, since a fair number of them escaped prosecution for obstruction of justice in the pedophile priest scandals. True immigration reform would be to repulse this invasion as the Constitution obliges the federal government to do-and Article I, Section 9 does not, I repeat not, qualifty the word invasison with the adjective armed.
This is neither conservative nor intellectual, but rather an insult to our intelligence. There is no need for the Roman Church to bring the sheep and lambs to our country to tend to them, since the Roman Church is right there in their countries of origin. Indeed, they are coming here because they can’t make a decent living under the feudalistic economic paradigm of the societies where the Roman Church has held sway for centuries. As the author of “The Americas” feature of the Wall Street Journal editorial page wrote some time ago, Latin America is economically backward because it missed the Protestant Reformation and the Industrial Revolution, and you don’t need to be an intellectual to figure out what organization was resonsible for that.
Ms. Fabrizio is using the same kind of transparently flawed logic as the Left, so why are her writings being published on an allegedly conservative Web site? One suspects that Ms. Fabrizo has an Obama sticker on her car.
Teflon93 | 1.16.10 @ 2:39PM
There is no such thing as "The Roman Church" and the need to resort to such falsehoods undermines your argument, such as it is.
Since Pentecostals have brought the Prosperity Gospel to Africa, I suppose your thesis will be put to the test, at which point given the sad decline of the continent you will no doubt be inclined to excuse it away.
Protestantism does not equal prosperity. The difference between Catholic and Protestant as marked in missionary efforts is that Catholics have since the beginning sought out the poor wherever they are, having embraced the whole of the Bible and Christ's commandments in that regard. Kindly Google Robert Louis Stevenson's scathing critique of the Anglican Bishop of Hawaii to see what I mean. And Stevenson was an Anglican himself embarrassed by his church's neglect of the poor.
Add to that the tendency of historically-Protestant countries to become atheists---and socialists---over time---see much of Protestant Europe---and you'll see the folly of making such a bigoted argument.
The Church has gotten that quite right too---recognizing as early as 1905 that modernism is the real enemy.
There is no "feudalistic economic paradigm" in Catholic countries---indeed, the "feudalistic economic paradigm of the Middle Ages is what created the prosperity the West draws on to this day in the first place. It did so because it didn't place absolute authority within the princes, a balance the Reformers unwisely undid. "Put not your faith in princes" ought to ring a bell.
Indeed, in most of the Third World where the Church holds sway it is the people's sole check on the autocrats in power. But by all means, sweep it aside because some clergymen upset you, empowering the demagogues who will not only upset you but take away your God-given liberty.
I question YOUR conservative bona fides, not Fabrizio's, given you seem not to comprehend whatsoever what the underpinnings of conservatism ARE.
John II| 1.16.10 @ 5:10PM
"Add to that the tendency of historically-Protestant countries to become atheists---and socialists---over time---see much of Protestant Europe---and you'll see the folly of making such a bigoted argument."
Funny you should mention this. It was Newman, I recall, who first suggested some time in the mid-nineteenth century that, sooner or later, Protestantism leads to atheism. When I first encountered that passing remark, I barely noticed it, since I was already familiar with the direction the Protestants in my extended family had taken, and my reading of Newman, in retrospect, was part of what was then drawing me into the "Roman Church."
In any event, that was many years ago, and many years later (i.e., about 15 years ago), I had some occasion to ask a Jesuit scholar at the school where I teach whether he could recollect exactly where Newman makes that passing remark. I was taken aback by his response. He was visibly annoyed with my question and insisted that he had no idea and no reason to suppose that Newman ever said anything of the sort.
It seemed to me that I had inadvertently touched a nerve, and to this day I'm not sure how to interpret his annoyance. His department ("religious studies") is staffed mostly by secular atheists for whom the study of religion is no more than a branch of anthropology, and I gather that he subscribes to a certain style of boutique "ecumenism" which tends to ignore or downplay religious differences. But I don't think such observations make up a sufficient explanation for the visceral annoyance he displayed at my question. I had breached some sort of unspoken etiquette by raising the issue at all.
Something similar, I believe, is going on with the topic of illegal immigration. It is somehow bad form to speak concretely of its baleful economic and social consequences. And I don't think the Catholic bishops are helping things much with public declamations redolent of their economic exhortations back in the 1980's, when the advisory staffs of the USCCB were firmly in the control of muddleheaded leftists. All they succeeded in doing was to dissipate their moral authority on matters truly within their sphere of competence and appropriate public witness.
Teflon93 | 1.17.10 @ 10:59AM
John, you raise some more excellent points.
Let me begin by first clarifying that by pointing out the trend toward atheism in historically-Protestant countries---even those with state-sponsored Protestant religions such as the UK--- to counter Ark's bogus claim that the Church drives socialism in Catholic countries, I was not making the claim that Catholic countries are immune to the drive toward secularism elsewhere in the West. Visit nominally Catholic France and see just how nominally Catholic it has become, for example. Since Ark seems to be fond of the notion---if not the practice---of burning down Catholic churches, he will find plenty of empty ones there ready for the tinder. If he mislikes long journeys to places where people do not speak English, he could instead take a shorter trip to New England where similar conditions abound. The battle, you see, is between the atheists and the religious, not between Southern Baptists and Catholics. It is the atheists who embrace socialism, for materialism and socialism go hand-in-glove. There are a number of bitter-ender Objectivists still around on the Right to be sure, but it is hard to be a fully-committed capitalist who insists upon trade unionism and remain an integrated intellect. More of these are in Fabrizio's camp than aren't. I suspect that were the illegal immigrants in question Fundamentalists rather than Catholics Ark would be telling Ms. Fabrizio what a wonderful article she'd written.
That said, the discredited "liberation theology" that echoes in this discussion did exist and did have some sway during its 80s heyday. Those bishops and priests are gone. Maybe there's one or two still out there in the hinterlands but Pope John Paul II---your nom-de-internet namesake---put paid to them when he schooled that disgraceful Nicaraguan cleric on the red carpet during his visit. I posted the relevant Catechism passage above; those Catholics who embrace socialism are defying Church teaching, but then again, what's new?
The Catholic Left has a tendency to be highly embarrassed by the ongoing success of the Church. They won't admit their folly on the right to life (the Church has opposed procured abortion since the 1st Century when Christ founded her; see Justin Martyr) or on pacifism (Just War Doctrine having been first articulated by the Church) or on sexual mores (any brave soul who dares to read "Humanae Vitae" these days will insist Paul VI be inscribed in the roll of the prophets). Rather than admit their own fallibility, they take potshots at the Pope's. But then, they always have.
I suspect it is this remnant of the post-Vatican II recession from the Church which you encountered. They fear triumph more than tragedy if that means they must acknowledge the authority of the Petrine See. Acknowledge it they must, for the words we long to hear are "Well done, thou good and faithful servant," not "Well done, thou hip and with it free spirit." As a former Protestant (raised Episcopalian, member of various Presbyterian, Methodist, and Pentecostal (Church of God) communities), one can only hope some of the folks whose position on this issue is determined by their anti-Catholic bigotry will reflect that it will be Christ who judges us rather than their pastor or Sacred Scripture abstracted. Perhaps their true aim is to make us emigrants rather then make our Catholic brothers and sisters south of the Rio Grande immigrants---they rather relish redefining "heathen man and publican" on novel grounds.
And isn't it unremitting novelty which is the engine of heresy and that ultimate heresy of atheism?
Yet another reason to caution Sister Fabrizio to avoid going beyond Church teaching in claiming that that which is not forbidden---open borders---is somehow required as a de fide.
John II| 1.17.10 @ 7:45PM
Interesting points, all familiar to me in my own experience, not to mention the warm fuzzies that come with listening to a kindred spirit. Thanks. I guess Lisa's not going to respond, unless perhaps she intends to do another piece on the same topic and a bit less in the manner of obiter dicta. We'll see what we'll see.
Meanwhile I need to apologize, Teflon93, for my imprecise recollection of your own nom de internet when I tried to get the last word in back at 4:17 p.m. on Thursday the 14th. The moniker "John II," by the way, doesn't come from my hero Wojtyla. What I recall having in mind was something a bit more exotic, and perhaps a tad pretentious.
I was thinking of Don John of Austria, the 24-year-old Catholic admiral of the Holy League, who stopped the infidels at Lepanto in October 1571--while my Protestant forebears were sitting on their butts in northern Europe and England. The consequence of a defeat would almost certainly have been a Europe overrun by the Ottoman Turks, with incalculable disasters for the New World and no chance of a USA ever appearing on the scene.
I think what Newman may have had in mind in his remark about Protestantism is the rationalist strain that generally runs through that persuasion in its various forms. Catholic Christianity (which broadly includes Anglicanism and Orthodoxy) is sacramentalist, alert to the connection between eternity and time, between the physical and the spiritual. Protestantism tends rather toward the abstract, emphasizing grace and atonement and justification to an extent that strips away the physical in deference to the cerebral. The focus of Catholic worship is the physical Eucharist; the focus of Protestant worship is the disembodied sermon. (I pass over the downside for Catholics--I mean, the awkward fact that most priests are rotten homilists: I would be happy with a Church law that required her priests to READ carefully written sermons--at least until the Church sees fit to include the intense study and practice of public oratory in the training of her priests. Where was I?)
Oh yes--about Newman's remark. Protestant rationalism is probably the source of the tendency toward atheism. By the 18th century, when rationalism became dominant in Western consciousness (as a long-term consequence of the Protestant Reformation), the West was also starting to lose touch with its Christian roots, and you have the astonishing spectacle of an anti-Christian Gibbon singing the praises of Islam.
That kind of romantic sentiment about Islam continues to the present day among the postmodern secular elite, utterly despite Islam's ferocious practice of the very depredations the secularists accuse Christianity of. I think one can at least partly account for such imbecility by supposing that a vacuum is left in the heart when one's grasp of metaphysical reality is as partial and selective as that afforded by the rationalist pose. Some sort of vagrant romantic impulse as determined by one's era is then stuffed into the vacuum. For the secular left in the West, Islam has become the stuffing du jour.
Which I think helps explain why today's liberals, the idiots currently steering the ship, have so much trouble taking the threat of Islamic jihadism seriously. We've got some scary days ahead of us.
Teflon93 | 1.18.10 @ 10:24AM
Right on as always, John. But threats always arise against the Church in any age---that's one of the clear markers of her as not being of the world she is invariably hated by it yet endures nonetheless.
As there must always be some sort of fall of Constantinople, there will always be some sort of Lepanto. That's the peril and promise of the gates of Hell not standing against her---they shall always try, they shall always fail. There's great consolation in that, if unending strife.
Rationalism has tended toward reductionism. Whenever the inexplicable is encountered, the rationalist must lay it aside. The world shrinks as a result. We see in liberals a constitutional inability to see evil as evil---they lack the philosophical framework for it at all but the most shallow level --- i.e. "Those who disagree with me."
You simply cannot be a fully-formed intellectual without the Church. It is an impossible task otherwise. Newman, Augustine, et al resisted mightily the truth of this but embraced it in the end as only then could they put those nagging voices of doubt to rest.
Such is the light of Christ---able to be seen and comprehended by simple fishermen and staggering geniuses alike. It is only pride in the end which prevents following that light. But such pride! Such light!
John II| 1.18.10 @ 9:55PM
Hi again, Teflon. Mostly I agree, but I wouldn't (and I'm guessing you wouldn't, really) be comfortable with the term "intellectual," as in "You simply can't be a fully formed intellectual without the Church." After Molnar's "Decline of the Intellectual," I can't think of "Catholic" and "intellectual" in the same predication. There are brilliant Catholics who are distinguished scholars or journalists, but there is no such thing as a Catholic philosophe. The terms are contradictory.
I've had my face in a book for roughly 53 of my 65+ years, and my college students, to my intense embarrassment, have called me "awesome" (by which they apparently mean that I've introduced them to ideas they've never been exposed to), but I would never think of myself as an "intellectual." I know quite enough to know that I don't know very much. I am a Roman Catholic Christian in full assent to the Church's magisterium. That's not normally the optic of the many people I'm acquainted with who really are "intellectuals," ignorant as they may be.
Teflon93 | 1.19.10 @ 3:33PM
You've got me there!
I should have said "have a fully-formed intellect" instead.
Thomas Sowell has rather nicely destroyed the pretenses of intellectuals and I yield to him.
Pingback| 1.15.10 @ 1:42PM
The Catholic Case for Immigration Reform « Immig Blog/Notes (www.sarponglaw.com) links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Norski| 1.15.10 @ 6:59PM
I would disagree with the idea that the motives of many of those who support Illegal Immigration is quite so lofty. Did you know that our current immigration system was designed by that Liberal Lion Teddy Kennedy to allow immigrants into the USA only if there is a shortage of workers? Thus by definition Illegal Immigration represents an oversupply of workers and a gift to those who would drive down wages.
As the product of three generations of Union Workers I know the devastation uncontrolled immigration can bring to employment and wages. But then along comes a couple of studies like the recent UCLA study or the Cato study, conveniently claiming that if we just throw out our current system we would be so much better off.
But you better not look at the details. Because if you do you discover that the latest CIR proposal is designed to usher those working illegally in the USA into a legal status that includes unionization. That sounds innocent enough – until you understand that union rules fostered by the National Labor Relations Board (a government agency) would now guarantee those jobs would continue to be held by those who came to and reside in the USA illegally. Meanwhile, those US Citizens and Legal Residents who lost their jobs because those working in the USA illegally undercut them wage-wise would be frozen out from the jobs they used to hold as the law pushes the wages up to the levels they used to earn before they were undercut. Thus, unemployed Union Members become like fatted calves offered up for the slaughter.
That is the point of all this. The Illegal Immigrant comes into the USA and undercuts the wages of the Citizen or Legal Resident, takes their job, then turns around and gets our own government to increase the wages back up and guarantee that the job is not lost back to those who used to do it but are now unemployed. And it is especially great if you can get someone who has an impressive enough title to shake and bake a study so that it seems like everyone wins. Except for the fatted calf that no one sees sacrificed. Is that fair? Remember, a turkey dinner is great for everyone but the turkey. And the end result is one less turkey in the world.
Teflon93 | 1.16.10 @ 2:42PM
This is of course very well-reasoned.
I can understand why liberal Democrats want unrestricted immigration---they are importing clients for the welfare state and answering the tendency of middle class Americans to like to vote for liberal Democrats less and less---so why are we looking to accelerate this trend?
What precisely are we seeking to conserve in the process?
Pingback| 1.15.10 @ 10:19PM
Traffic-stopping billboards – Shark Tales – IT World Canada Blogs | Advertising Marke links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
bobc| 1.17.10 @ 11:17AM
Every country is experiencing problems with illegal immigration, riots in Italy, car burnings in France, no jobs in Spain.....
Why is it if a US citizen wants illegals gone, and limited legal immigration, due to our job losses and massive government spending programs, we are called all sorts of names?
I think it is disgusting that our government is planning to cut Medicare to our own elderly citizens, while they want amnesty for illegals and they continue to allow illegals or legal people to come here, in these awful economic times!
Many economists are already saying the USA will default on their loans.....we cannot be the savior to the whole world's people!
JimBeam| 1.18.10 @ 2:48PM
This thread proves that conservatives are "Cafeteria Catholics" too. They have just chosen different items.
Teflon93 | 1.18.10 @ 3:18PM
How so, Jim?
(interestingly when I tried to post the above it scolded me for not making my point in English---no cafeteria at AmSpec!)
Pingback| 1.18.10 @ 3:43PM
Blogs by David Tatosian : Catholics And Their Comprehensive Reform links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Pingback| 1.26.10 @ 3:10AM
. o O ( Dating Younger Women l Meeting Younger Women l Approaching Younger … Review: links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
Office 2007 Professional | 1.29.10 @ 2:03AM
Office 2007 Professional
Office 2007 Ultimate
Pingback| 2.20.10 @ 3:40PM
Marriage Calculator figures divorce odds | DivorceNews.info links to this page. Here’s an excerpt:
d | 4.2.10 @ 4:09AM
dxx
karen | 4.2.10 @ 4:38AM
For men always fit the occasion if there is any doubt about what a man should wear. Sometimes an invitation is not very specific about the www.herveleger-outlet.com
; or it’s a place you are not familiar with so you don’t know what the dress code for the venue is likely to be. www.us-chaneloutlet.comIt’s very embarrassing to be asked to put on something more suitable or to ‘up’ one’s dress standards before being allowed to enter a restaurant or nightclub.
Immigrant kid | 4.9.10 @ 10:00PM
It fits our needs perfectly the advantage of immigration reform on the country: Greater supply of unskilled workers, a younger workforce, and skilled workers in needed sectors. But there is also a disadvantage of immigration reform like Greater poverty, more educational cost, lower unskilled wage levels, and increased danger of terrorism. Thanks to the post!
will| 5.1.10 @ 11:52AM
It's some pretty great info, I know some people that will really enjoy this.
ask information
Luci| 6.7.10 @ 3:14AM
If the church wants to help with reform, let it start by helping people in their own country. Remember also, that there is a big difference between legal and illegal immigration. The US bishops are wrong about this immigration reform. Go to these foreign countries and actually help the people rather than telling them to all go to America
FRrnk Provasek| 8.2.10 @ 4:11PM
"Unchecked illegal immigration, because of it's overpopulation, it's wanton theft of other people's lives and it's ignorance of what created the golden goose it wishes to raid, is central to the culture of death. "
I thought abortion was the culture of death. How many so-called Christian Americans have forgotten the Word of God...
The people of the land practice extortion and commit robbery; they oppress the poor and needy and mistreat the alien, denying them justice." Ezekiel 22:29
"Do not take advantage of a hired man who is poor and needy, whether he is a brother Israelite or an alien living in one of your towns." Deuteronomy 24:14
Michael Thomas| 8.14.10 @ 1:08PM
John Paul made it clear on July 25, 1995, during an address at the World Migration Day, that illegal immigration should be prevented and the problems and issues causing the migration should be addressed starting with the immigrant's home country. We, the people in the host country, should provide the necessary means of subsistence and assist the immigrant in becoming a citizen. John Paul also stated that if the host country will not accept the immigrant, we the people in the host country, should encourage the immigrant to return home or seek relocation to another country.
If the American Catholic Bishops are attempting to exercise their advocacy role they should begin by seeking assistance from Catholics in North, South and Central American. The American Catholic Bishops should be assisting the Mexican Bishops in address their problems at home and the American Catholic Bishops should seek other countries that might accept the immigrant.
The American Catholic Bishops decided to enter this discussion. They need to engage their critics in clear and concise language.
Online Instant Messengers | 9.17.10 @ 12:12PM
So there it is. Of course it's obvious, yet needing to be noted anyway that Don's personal and business relationship --official ones -- are ending at the same moment. There much more that can be said about both.
Delfin| 10.2.10 @ 4:46PM
Well if we're talking about catholics, then we should also be talking about mobile gay porn while we're at it.
the beginning's moons | 10.4.10 @ 2:29AM
That there is a big difference between legal and illegal immigration. The US bishops are wrong about this immigration reform. Go to these foreign countries and actually help the people rather than telling them to all go to America.
networking johannesburg | 11.1.10 @ 1:07AM
My perception of Catholics and middle class Americans is more clear now.
jim| 11.8.10 @ 4:34AM
During a game between the New Jersey Nets and the Toronto Raptors, the Raptors’ mascot literally ate a cheerleader. It’s very funny.Alec Difrawi
dan | 11.9.10 @ 7:15AM
most of the immigrants are catholic any way.
good writing
Columbus Ohio Home Builders | 11.17.10 @ 9:51PM
And it's poor because it is now and always has been hopelessly corrupt. Geographically, the country itself is fabulously rich in mineral resources and arable land and stunning vistas. But it's run mostly by criminals and wannabe caudillos and fatuous intellectuals--abetted by chic snots from abroad.
infacnt urn | 12.5.10 @ 4:37AM
I totally agree with the concern posted by Lisa Fabrizio good work. ..
Canker Sore Treatment | 12.5.10 @ 10:06AM
I believe we should all help one another. Isn't that what the Catholic religion preaches through the Bible?
William Homes | 12.13.10 @ 12:10PM
There is a lot of great information that should be seriously considered when making a decision.
H. Hunkerson | 12.15.10 @ 7:27AM
I agree 100% Most of our families did come to America as immigrants, but the legal way through Ellis Island and such. It's not that hard to just do it legitimately, it just takes a little more patience.
spiderman games | 12.26.10 @ 11:44PM
I agree that this site is better than other, especially when it comes to quality. I have been using this site for the last 3 months it never dissapointed me. Does anybody know when the new version is coming out?
mick stop | 2.2.11 @ 10:16PM
Its pathetic to see immigrants getting exploited. A lot of people illegal or legal get exploited in the hands of higher authorities daily because of their helplessness.
eliminatae credit debt | 2.15.11 @ 7:27PM
I agree completely with the author's comments, as it is sad not only that the name of religion is used for selfish purposes, but also that immigrants are now the target of these vain exploits. People really need to rationally evaluate their actions and separate what is actually religious and what is using religion for their own benefit.
Converse | 8.11.11 @ 9:53PM
is good