The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops policy paper on its support of illegal immigration

U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops ^ | Walter Ewing

[garbageseeker]

I am posting this article because very few people know that the Catholic Church is going out of their way to make sure CIRA is the law of the land. The church has supported illegal immigration for many years and they have been active in getting CIRA passed. I also publishing this article in the hopes that the many Catholics who support the House of Representatives would know what their church is doing on the illegal immigration issue in the United States. I really do not think that Roman Catholics know the churches position on this matter.I know that there are many Catholics out there who support the "borders enforcement only" approach, not the approach the pro-illegal immigrant. approach our leaders has taken.

[garbageseeker]

Bump

[Torie]

Splendid, and what does that have to do with how free labor inputs should be? In fact come to think of it, to the extent Marxist are into economic autarky, they would tend to be Buchananites when it comes to the free transfer of labor inputs, since that would undermine the autarky. The whole thing is totally ridiculous, and a red herring, and a distraction.

[WOSG]

"If people want to get rid of birthright citizenship for future children that is fine. That could be a possible solution."

It would be. The USCCB would oppose it.

The USCCB says they are not for 'open borders'. yet they opposed the HR4437 bill for including provisions for expedited removal, for holding border crossers (instead of catch-and-release, which undermines the whole enforcement effort). etc.


"I would have to think a guestworker program"
Okay as long as you dont make it a backdoor amnesty ... " some pathway to citizenship " ... amnesty is not okay, it will only make the problem worse.

"Deportation of the criminals that are here and those that commit serious crimes in the future, real border security, and real employee sanctions is the other side of the coin."

that above is all you need, and it is provided in HR4437.

[garbageseeker]

Say it long enough people would start to believe you.

Liberation Theology(religious Marxism) is being used to justify illegal immigration.

[garbageseeker]

Read the Liberation Theology. I have it posted. Maybe it holds the answers to some of your questions.

[catholicfreeper]

This a statement from current Pope when the he just a Cardinal heading up the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith under JOhn Paul II

INSTRUCTION ON CERTAIN ASPECTS OF THE
"THEOLOGY OF LIBERATION"
http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_19840806_theology-liberation_en.html


There are many other documents from the former Popehimself. The above and this debate has nothing to do with Marxism or liberation theolgy. If it did, I find it strange that the current POPE who wrote this statement in 84 has not even uttered a peep of concern.

[sinkspur]

You don't even know what "in the Church" means. If you deny that non-Catholics, Jews, and members of other religions cannot be saved because they are not formal members of the Church, you are wrong.

Father Feeney was condemned by Pius XII, in 1946, for just such a position. I will post the letter from the Holy Office tomorrow.

[catholicfreeper]

What? John Paul II was a great foe of LIberation Theolgy. In fact he was the expert on it. HE condemmed it. This has nothing to do with Liberation Theolgy. Just because there is poor folks involved in some cases doesnt mean that every thing is liberation Theology

[WOSG]

And you're wasting bandwidth bringing up a personal side issue. Let it rest.

[garbageseeker]

If an theology is banned does not necessarily mean that its still being followed or the ban is being enforced.

Cardinal Roger Mahoney and the USCCB and their stance in on illegal immigration. It looks to me that they are still believe in it.

[Torie]

Maybe someone should post the bullet points of the "theology of liberation."

[reductio]

You just called an infallible statement a falsity. Hey, that ain't my problem.

[sinkspur]

A Catholic belonging to the Masons is not a "side" issue. Catholics are forbidden from joining Lodges.

For garbageseeker to come on here, ranting at the bishops when he himself is in violation of Church law, is the height of hypocrisy.

[reductio]

The letter you are talking about was 1949, not 1946. If you need any further help, let me know.

This is a little off the subject, but can you show me some secret handshakes?

[WFBFan]

"So, a succession of popes beginning with Peter and continuting down the line to Benedict XVI is not proof."

The only evidence that Peter was the first Pope is Catholic tradition, not history or scripture. When did Peter himself claim he was a "pope"? He claimed no primacy for himself. In fact, at the Jerusalem conference in Acts 15, it was not Peter who led the meeting (although he was there).

What's more, the "Church" referred to in the New Testament did not refer to a specific hierarchy, but the the entire body of believers. What matters is our relationship with Christ and our belief in him. There is no temporal intercessor required.

[sinkspur]

Eugene was wrong about shedding blood for Christ. It is formally defined as "baptism of Blood," and is the method by which the Holy Innocents, who were not baptised, were saved.

You really do need to learn some basic ecclesiology. And you need to learn what "in the Church" means so that you will understand Eugene's statement.

[WOSG]

"Maybe someone should post the bullet points of the "theology of liberation.""

This book touches on it:

http://www.cmpage.org/betrayal/index.html

See:
http://www.cmpage.org/betrayal/chapt6.html

[Torie]

Put it in your own words. These long cut and pastes are the most annoying of all. There is too much cut and paste around here, and not enough brevity is the soul of wit in parsing matters down to the nub, in a way that communicates something tangible.

[sinkspur]

Ah, so you know of the letter. Then how can you come on here and make the statements you make?

Let me guess: Pius XII was wrong.

[garbageseeker]

Those are very good links