Posted on 04/18/2008 6:43:58 PM PDT by ovrtaxt
He seems to be in favor of us tearing down our border wall.
Save your ammunition, Tancredo. For the first thing, the Pope has no power over our policy, and even his opinion doesn’t have much influence. The Vatican has opposed the Iraq war, too; look how influential that was.
For the second...he’s the Pope. Pick your immigration fights with someone else. How much traction is your policy going to get from picking on the Pope?
Nope. I have 44 years of lifetime experience (as a Catholic) that has seen The Church blame America for
1) The fight against foreign enemies (the Soviet Union excepted.)
2)Immigration policies expounded buy every Pope in my lifetime ( They don't have to put up with illegals demanding their "rights" in St. Peter's Square.)
3) That we, as the "richest" nation on Earth, exploit all third world countries (as if feeding and educating them is exploitation.)
4)America is destroying the plant through "climate change".
Buy=by
plant =planet.
Of course I object to real violence. That’s a given.
You are clearly missing the main points of Tancredo’s objection to the Pope’s comments.
To start, let us consider the second part of the Pope’s statement, rather than focusing on the first: “so that immigrants may lead dignified lives.” The Pope knows that illegal immigration is a hot button issue in the US. But he did not delineate between legal and illegal immigration in his comments.
Now on to the first part: “all forms of violence.” The inference can be made that, in the Pope’s view, any action such as denial of benefits, prosecution, or deportation, amounts to a form of violence. I think that it could very easily be interpreted in this way [see below for more evidence as to why], and I believe that this is the way Tancredo interpreted it.
So now, the statement in its entirety: “The US must do everything possible to fight all forms of violence so that immigrants may lead dignified lives.” Notice that this protection from violence extends only to immigrants. The Pope did not say that the US must do everything in its power to protect ALL of its CITIZENS from violence. Nope, just the immigrants.
Why did the Pope state it in this manner? Because he was directly addressing the United States’ immigration policy, that’s why. And because the Pope has been repeatedly pushing the issue during meetings with Bush since he took residence in the Vatican. Other Bishops below him also have been pushing the issue. They all want a more OPEN immigration policy.
Tancredo knows that that was the true thrust of the Pope’s statement — and that it was NOT just an innocent, innocuous general plea for people to be able to lead “dignified lives” without “violence” — and therefore he called the Pope on it.
Also, the phrase “dignified lives” itself is not further defined — and Tom Tancredo knows that for the Pope, one contingency of an immigrants’ living a “dignified life” — whether that immigrant is here illegally or not — is to be allowed to continue to live that life in the US. Otherwise the “violence” is present and the “dignity” is lost.
Tancredo knew the history of the Pope’s meetings with Bush and of His Holiness’s push for a more open border policy, and Tom called him on it. Good for him, I say.
Lombardi:: Thank you, Your Holiness. Another theme upon which we had many questions from our colleagues was that of immigration, reflecting the growing presence of Hispanics in the society of the United States. We’ll have a question from our colleague Andres Beltramo, from the Notimex agency in Mexico.A link to the transcriptBeltramo: I’ll ask the question in Italian, but we would love to have just a greeting in Spanish. With the enormous growth in the Hispanic presence, the Catholic church in the United States is becoming steadily more bilingual and bicultural. Yet there’s also a growing “anti-immigrant” movement in America. Do you intend to invite the United States to welcome immigrants well, many of whom are Catholic?
Benedict XVI:
Unfortunately I’m not ready to speak in Spanish, but I offer a greeting and blessing for all the Spanish-speakers! Certainly I’ll talk about this subject. I recent had the ad limina visit from the bishops of Central America, also South America. I saw the scope of this problem, above all the grave problem of the separation of families. This is truly dangerous for the social, human and moral fabric of these countries.It seems to me that we have to distinguish between measures to be taken immediately, and longer-term solutions. The fundamental solution [would be] that there is no longer any need to immigrate, that there are sufficient opportunities for work and a sufficient social fabric that no one any longer feels the need to immigrate. We all have to work for this objective, that social development is sufficient so that citizens are able to contribute to their own future.
On this point, I want to speak with the President, because above all the United States must help countries develop themselves. Doing so is in the interests of everyone, not just this country but the whole world, including the United States.
In the short term, it’s very important above all to help the families. This is the primary objective, to ensure that families are protected, not destroyed. Whatever can be done, must be done. Naturally, we have to do whatever’s possible against economic insecurity, against all the forms of violence, so that they can have a worthy life.
I’d like also to say that although there are many problems, so much suffering, there’s also much hospitality [in America.] I know that the bishops’ conference in America collaborates a great deal with the Latin American bishops’ conference. Together they work to help priests, laity and so on. With so many painful things, it’s also important not to forget much good and many positive actions.
Those are rather KEY words, wouldn't you say?
They don’t seem to be taking to much notice of the “obey its laws” [including, oh just for example, the law against illegal immigration] part of their catechism.
Here is Michelle Malkin’s take on it:
http://michellemalkin.com/2008/04/18/open-borders-and-the-catholic-elite/
Oops,
to = too
That list smells a lot like rino crap.
LLS
I like full context. The following adds to it.
He didn’t say “illegal”.
However, the Catholic Church isn’t quite as concerned about country boundaries, being focused on getting people over the boundary into the next life in Heaven.
Tancredo of course knows a lot better than the Pope.
Yeah, actually I’d agree with you too. I originally said “good for him” but Tancredo isn’t going to bring more people over to his cause by attacking the Pope, no matter what you think about the Pope’s statements. Maybe should have just ignored the Pope, and let his statements drift into the news dustbin.
Oh gee, thanks a lot for pinging him to this thread! lol
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.