Archbishop may defy migrant rules (San Antonio/South Texas)

San Antonio Express-News ^ | 14 April 2006 | J. Michael Parker

[Racehorse]

San Antonio Archbishop José Gomez says he'll adhere to his faith and break the law if a congressional proposal criminalizing humanitarian assistance to undocumented immigrants prevails, though he'd consult with fellow Texas bishops before asking subordinates to follow his lead.

[. . .]

The archbishop, himself an immigrant from Monterrey, Mexico, told the Express-News Tuesday that "if they push us to that point, we'll have to choose (between faith and the law). It's a non-negotiable principle of our faith that we must welcome the immigrant and practice charity."

Referring to a bill passed by the House in December, which includes a provision that would make felons of undocumented immigrants and criminals of people who assist them, Gomez said: "'Love thy neighbor' is the very essence of the Christian faith, and (the bill) asks us to violate it."

[. . .]

Gomez, the spiritual leader of nearly 1 million Catholics in San Antonio and South Texas, was emphatic about being forced into a corner.

"If they tell me I can't practice my religion, I'll break the law," he said.

[. . .]

Under current law, it is a felony for any person who "encourages or induces an alien to come to, enter or reside in the United States."

The key difference is the "assist" clause, which has caused an uproar among religious leaders because it suggests humanitarian efforts would be criminalized.

[clawrence3]

I agree that any illegal alien caught deserves the appropriate punishment mandated under the law - in the meantime, they also deserve every right afforded to other "persons", as opposed to those reserved only to "citizens" for example. I appreciate you taking the time to discuss the issue calmly. Let me know if you have any more questions.

[clawrence3]

Some illegal aliens are here against their will as well. And, as I pointed out, some are escaping from even harsher living conditions than slaves were subjected to in 1860. Bottom line, though, both groups "broke the law" crossing over the border. We know that people like Racehorse would have fully prosecuted those assisting runaway slaves - the only question left is should those running the underground railroad have only "given them food and turned them in"?

[StarfireIV]

"True Catholics will always choose the Church, regardless of the law..."
That's why so many people have a problem with it.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"he's using his citizenship of the Vatican..."

Point of information: is Abp. Gomez a citizen of the Vatican? I don't think so. Citizenship is limited to the population of the Vatican, which is 932 (2006 est.) I think Gomez is a U.S. citizen.

[clawrence3]

Perhaps you can answer this question then: should those who assisted slaves by running the underground railroad have only "given them food and turned them in"?

[Mrs. Don-o]

While the Christian faith normally requires obedience to secular law, EVERY Christian is obliged to disobey the law of the land under two circumstances: (1) when the law of the land forbids what the law of God requires, or (2) when the law of the land requires what the law of God forbids.

I presume the same is true for religious Jews and other people of faith.

If this means there should be no religious tax exemptions, well, that's worth debating. But it's not just a Catholic thing. It's a God thing.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Acts 5:29

But Peter and the apostles answered, "We must obey God rather than men."

[Mrs. Don-o]

All Christians believe that God's law supersedes man's law.

[Military family member]

Why not? most of our ancestors did.

[Mrs. Don-o]

"Obviously, if a law really is immoral, Christians should violate it regardless of the consequences. If, on the other hand, the law is reasonable, citizens have a valid reason for opposing any organization that encourages members to ignore it."

That sounds about right to me.

[StarfireIV]

Your question is irrelevant. Escaped slaves did not have a process and a legal alternative to leaving the south.
Were the Catholics who deliberately covered up the recent pedophilia scandal "true"?

[Mrs. Don-o]

Well, Jesus said he was God. That was illegal.

[Polybius]

This church needs to loose it non-profit status for taking a political stand and choosing to ignore the law of the land.

Why does everyone get their short in a knot about the Catholic Church providing "humanitarian aid" to illegal aliens but, when it comes to actually doing something practical about illegal aliens, SUCH AS IMPOSING DRACONIAN FINES AND PRISON TERMS ON ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS, all you hear is the sound of chirping crickets?

The fact of the matter is that Congress is populated by political whores who gladly take campaign contributions from illegal employer lobbyists in return for ignoring the root cause of why illegal aliens come here in the first place.

As a result, the issue is transformed into "the criminalization of humanitarian aid", the illegal aliens still have illegal jobs, the Bishop bloviates about the poor, the Congressman bloviates about how he is controlling the border, the illegal employer laughs all the way to the bank and America continues to get flooded with illegal aliens while the rest of us argue about the Catholic Church.

[Racehorse]

Some illegal aliens are here against their will as well. And, as I pointed out, some are escaping from even harsher living conditions than slaves were subjected to in 1860. Bottom line, though, both groups "broke the law" crossing over the border.

You need to better describe "against their will."  Surely, you're not making equivalent the plight of someone trafficked for sexual exploitation, for instance, (who believed they were legally brought into the country) with someone intentionally crossing the border for work cleaning up New Orleans.

We know that people like Racehorse would have fully prosecuted those assisting runaway slaves - the only question left is should those running the underground railroad have only "given them food and turned them in"?

What was their duty under the law?  The Fugitive Slave Law of 1850

I routinely violate the traffic laws (well, not so routinely anymore), some through sheer carelessness and some through willful disregard.  Because so many laws are on the books, I'm sure there are many others I violate through simple ignorance.  What should I do?  I should obey the laws.

[bill1952]

God did not tell us to flood American with illegal immigrants.

This is a political agenda.

[Racehorse]

. . . it comes to actually doing something practical about illegal aliens, SUCH AS IMPOSING DRACONIAN FINES AND PRISON TERMS ON ILLEGAL EMPLOYERS . . .

Exactly right.  Nothing infuriates me more than listening to President Bush continue to repeat the lie that immigrants are needed to do the jobs Americans will not.  Employers are the root of the problem.

At the same time, I do favor some kind of Guest Worker Program which is pegged to the availability of labor.  Can't hire enough American or Green Card immigrant carpenters?  Recruit temporary Guest Workers.  I'm fine with that.  Need someone with special skills or someone with clearly superior technical skills?  Recruit a temporary Guest Worker.  And, I'm all in favor of providing those Guest Workers with a reasonable and achievable path to citizenship, especially and particularly if they have an "immediate" family member serving in our Armed Forces.

[RobbyS]

Most are not. There is nothing like the "Potatoe" Famine ravaging the region south of the border.

[Young Scholar]

All Christians believe that God's law supersedes man's law.

True, but most Protestants won't agree that the Catholic Church's interpretation of God's law necessarily does.

[Mrs. Don-o]

Your reply on Catholicism is interesting and thoughtful. But what do you make of the historic fact that Protestantism is the "father" of secularism? Whole swaths of Europe which were historically Protestant (Norway, Sweden, Denmark, northern Germany, England, Scotland, the Netherlands, etc.) are now thoroughly secular and religiously dead.

I don't say this with any Catholic-Triumphalist spirit. Far from it. A generation or two later, we see historically-Catholic Ireland, Portugal, Spain,Italy, etc. "catching up with" the Protestant vanguard (keywords: hell, handbasket.) And the same is true of historically Orthodox Greece, Russia, Bulgaria, etc. Largely secular (no matter their nominal affiliations) and demographically imploding, all of them.

This is surely the fruit of a lack of faith in the One True God.

You wrote: "I think this Protestant worldview (or other worldviews that similarly support a free-market sustem) must be held by much of the population. "

I can't help noticing that your own assessment of religion per se is preponderantly secular. You evaluate it according to how unswervingly faithful it is to capitalism and free markets, rather than how faithful it is to the Gospel. Was that your intention?

[clawrence3]

Only God knows the answer to that question (at least my question had to do with the subject matter of this thread).