DING! DING! DING!
WE HAVE A WINNER!!!
(Tell him what he's won, Johnny.....)
Posted on 04/18/2006 3:45:55 PM PDT by HEMICRASHBOX
A new poll shows U.S. Catholics, like Americans at large, oppose granting amnesty to illegal aliens, despite their bishops' stance in favor of such a path to citizenship.
"Catholics appear to be slightly to the left of the American public at large on the issue of immigration," said Zogby spokesman Fritz Wenzel, adding they are not as liberal as the U.S. bishops, who have issued six pastoral letters on immigration in the past 20 years.
When asked "Do you support or oppose amnesty for undocumented workers who are already in the U.S.?" 34 percent of Catholics said they support it, 49 percent oppose it and 15 percent were unsure. Fifty-two percent of Americans overall oppose amnesty while 32 percent support it, according to a Zogby survey taken from March 31 to April 3.
"Catholics are slightly more in favor of granting amnesty to undocumented workers already working in America," Mr. Wenzel said. "They are slightly less concerned that increased rights for those workers could lead to split allegiances among those workers between America and Mexico, and they trust Democrats slightly more than Republicans to better handle the immigration issue."
But despite Catholics' generally softer stance on immigration, their bishops go much further by supporting an "earned legalization" program for illegals. Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony has said he'd go to jail rather than follow a proposed law that he said would require priests to demand legal documentation before assisting immigrants, and Washington Cardinal Theodore E. McCarrick gave the opening speech at a recent massive immigration rally on the Mall.
(Excerpt) Read more at wpherald.com ...
A microcosm of American society as a whole. A vast majority of all Americans are against illegal immigration and amnesty, yet our leaders are all for it.
Or is this a way for the church to expand its ranks when the numbers are declining?
>>All you have to do is ask the parishioners how they feel about law breakers.
Yea, like speeding, cheating on taxes, etc. I'd say just about everyone in the parish is guilty of doing some illegal act -- so don't expect many to cast the first stone...
The Ayatollahs, i.e., Cardinals McCarrick and MAHONY and their Mullahs(Bishops) have complete contempt for the laws of the USA.
You might recall how these ayatollahs and mullahs treated the issue of the PEDOPHILE PRIEST and the manner in which they utilized their position to protect their little CLERGY CLUB from the prosecution while maintaining a total contempt for the faithful that trusted in them!
These BISHOPS TREAT THE ILLEGAL ALIEN LAWS IN OUR COUNTRY IN THE SAME MANNER THAT THEY TREATED THE PEDOPHILE LAWS!
The following is an excerpt for a previous post of a NRO article dealing with the Ayattollah Mahony & his attitude towards USA LAW:
The American legal tradition has until now assumed that it takes a congressional enactment or a judicial ruling to overturn a duly enacted law. With the ubiquitous chant, "No person is illegal," first popularized by Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony, that tradition is over. Pace Cardinal Mahony, under existing immigration law, a person may in fact be "illegal," if he has broken into the country without permission or has overstayed his visa. Mahoney and the hordes who have taken up the "No person is illegal" slogan beg to differ. No law has the power to confer illegal status on an alien law-breaker, they say. Therefore, the existing laws are void — simply because the illegal aliens and their supporters do not like them, not because Congress has decided to withdraw them. This alleged power to overturn laws based on sheer presence is a remarkable new constitutional development.
These Bishops are just as guilty as the perpetrators of these on felonies on these poor boys!
This NRO piece is a rant. Where, exactly, is the quote from Mahoney that states that "nobody is illegal"? And where are the quotes that state Mahoney believes there should be no laws against illegal immigration?
Your rants against the Catholic Church are growing tiresome, and they're all the same.
If you want to know what the US Catholic Church believes about immigration, go here.
Bishops can be like American politicians. They are alike in the fact that usually live in secluded, extremely nice homes and neighborhoods thereby causing them to never understand what it is like to live with illegal immigrants. Case in point - we have a friend who lives in Jackson Heights, NY in Queens in a nice middle-class neighborhood consisting of single family homes. Then they noticed what looked many, many Mexican people hanging around a particular house day and night. As our friend said it was "not nice". We all know that this won't happen to the Bishops' homes and certainly not the politicians' homes. So they live completely apart from the American people who are the ones who have to put up with the living with illegal Mexican immigrants.
Not only that, but what are the poll results if you ask about "path to citizenship" rather than "amnesty"? I thought Free Republic was skeptical about ALL polling, but I guess not.
That is exactly the point! There is NO financial interest in the Catholic Church sticking up for them, and they still are doing it out of a calling of love ultimately shown to all of us by Jesus Christ.
sw
You don't know what the hell you're talking about. You really don't.
That is the primary mission of the Church. Governments and countries come and go but Christ is eternal.
75% sounds a little high, given the total number of Catholics in the Los Angeles arhdiocese - keep in mind it's not just Latinos - Asian Catholics now outnumber white Catholics. Each week in L.A., the Mass is celebrated in 42 different languages (43 if you count Mel Gibson's Latin Mass ; )
http://publicpolicy.pepperdine.edu/davenportinstitute/reports/faithandpublicpolicy2004/Faith%20and%20PP%20report.pdf
The Archdiocese of Los Angeles is about 75% Hispanic in its Catholic population.
According to the report linked above, roughly three-quarters of the archdiocese's parishes have at least one Mass in Spanish - I don't know that that translates to 3/4 of all parishioners being Latino though - any more than the one venue our Church holds in Spanish translates to south Orange County, CA at large.
They are doing it because they are Democratic party hacks. The fact is that Catholic teaching does not infallibly support their perspective. The issue of illegal immigration falls into the category of justice which has as its overriding concern the common good. The common good is not well served where contempt of the law is urged. A nation has both a duty and responsibility under the natural law to protect its citizens while being generous in admitting persons from outside its borders needing refuge. The US has never faltered on that last account and it doesn't intend to do so now. The prospective laws are merely intended to try to stem the flow of illegals to a manageable level. Those laws are reasonable while the reaction of many of the bishops is wholly unreasonable and fostered more by politics than religion. As such they should be held accountable under the law and arrested for egregious violations.
Were they "party hacks" when they were refusing to grant pro-choice politicians Holy Communion?
The fact is that Catholic teaching does not infallibly support their perspective. The issue of illegal immigration falls into the category of justice which has as its overriding concern the common good. The common good is not well served where contempt of the law is urged.
Which is why I make the argument that the "common good" would mandate legalizing those already here.
A nation has both a duty and responsibility under the natural law to protect its citizens while being generous in admitting persons from outside its borders needing refuge. The US has never faltered on that last account and it doesn't intend to do so now.
Never? We have, in the past, shut down all immigration - and several on these threads want to do that again.
The prospective laws are merely intended to try to stem the flow of illegals to a manageable level. Those laws are reasonable while the reaction of many of the bishops is wholly unreasonable and fostered more by politics than religion.
If said laws would have authorized the arrest of Priests for simply saying Mass and offering Holy Communion to illegal aliens, I fail to see how opposition to that is fostered more by politics than religion.
As such they should be held accountable under the law and arrested for egregious violations.
I completely agree that Priests will go to jail over their "violations" on Man's law on this point - not sure you want that PR crisis on your watch though ; )
Care to explain your stance?
Who authorized Bishop Barnes to spend this money for the home?
Does Bishop Barnes have a Board of Directors in his diocese to approve this purchase?
Here's one of your questions, Rick.
I don't know the answers to your question (although $650,000 doesn't buy as much home as you would think anymore in California). I take it you skipped right over the part where the good Bishop had been living in a tiny home, among the working poor, for all those years?
Your concern about the living arrangements of the Catholic hierarchy is interesting, but ultimately irrelevant to anything, in the long run.
How does Bishop Barnes reach out to the people?
Does he telecommute?
Who are the people that Bishop Barnes reaches out to?
Do you have any information on this unique kind of ministry?
Well we agree on one thing, until 2001 when President Bush began his "Guest Worker" Amnesty encouragement, that house might have been to small to accommodate 8 people in one room, now it can hold 20, zoning laws be darned!
A little-mentioned silver lining to all that illegal immigration was the economic growth from the booming housing market - you really want the prices to drop dramatically in California?
Silver Lining? For whom and for how long? I prefer to look a little longer down the road than this month's income and assets. The country is being destroyed and Balkanized and you are looking for your 30 pieces of silver...
Well, for the 2/3 of Americans who own their home, for starters. I doubt the bottom falling out of the housing market would do anyone but speculators any good.
Only 57% of Californians own their own home, second worst state in the nation. Is that part of your silver lining of inflated home prices? There is one good thing, one could sell their home in Mexifornia and move to an illegal alien non-friendly state like Georgia and probably improve their standards of living without having to learn Spanish. Where do you live?
California.
California
Um that's a big state, whereabouts?
Orange County - you?
San Diego County, entryway to the USA for millions of lawbreakers. Many of whom end up in Orange County.
"Were they "party hacks" when they were refusing to grant pro-choice politicians Holy Communion?"
Those are a different set of bishops. The bishops of Lincoln, Denver, and St. Louis in particular. The one's vocal on this issue of immigration were notoriously silent on the issue of abortion during the election.
"Which is why I make the argument that the "common good" would mandate legalizing those already here."
If that action encourages lawlessness and anarchy, the argument against it is just as strong. Prudential judgment can come to such a conclusion and that is why this is not a theological issue, but a political one.
"Never? We have, in the past, shut down all immigration - and several on these threads want to do that again."
I've only heard that they want to shut down illegal immigration, by its nature a violation of the law, and immoral on its face. The immoral nature of the act can under the natural law be nullified by urgent human need, but the possibility of criminals and terrorists entering the same way is sufficient to warrant safeguards even in such cases. The evil inflicted on those who are justified in entering illegally is a secondary effect. The primary effect of the legislation is to keep out the persons intent on doing harm.
"If said laws would have authorized the arrest of Priests for simply saying Mass and offering Holy Communion to illegal aliens, I fail to see how opposition to that is fostered more by politics than religion."
My reading of the pending legislation gives no indication that such a ludicrous objective is even being postulated. It's a red herring.
"I completely agree that Priests will go to jail over their "violations" on Man's law on this point - not sure you want that PR crisis on your watch though ; )"
The problem is that they are violating a just law and nothing they have offered to date indicates otherwise. Nothing in the pending legislation can be infallibly called 'unjust' under the natural law. Nor is there any Church legislation that would argue otherwise, since the Church can not pass legislation that dis-establishes any natural law precept.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.