Posted on 04/14/2006 2:35:21 PM PDT by 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.
(Excerpt) Read more at mysanantonio.com ...
Well, if the "law" said you could not say Mass and offer Holy Communion to an illegal alien, I would hope EVERY Bishop not follow that "law".
If he breaks the law he should be arrested and charged and his church should lose tax exempt status.
Amen!
This is the problem with Durbin's amendment. Legitimate humanitarian assistance is rendered only in emergency situations, and without compenstation.
"Current legislative proposals could make an organization guilty of alien smuggling, an aggravated felony, if they helped an individual in need before verifying whether the person is a legal immigrant."
There's nothing in HR 4437 to this effect. I've looked. Please feel free to point to applicable line-items in context if you feel I'm mistaken.
I haven't known many Catholics, but in general I've liked the ones I have known. As for the Catholic Church as a whole, I think it deserves a lot of credit for remaining relatively conservative in the face of the secularism that is increasing popular in the Western world.
On the other hand, I believe the Protestant ethic is responsible for the development of capitalism, and Catholic views on social justice are often harmful to this (many Protestant denominations are no better, though). Thus, for the US to remain economically free (and it is when compared to most European countries, which are either Catholic or secular), I think this Protestant worldview (or other worldviews that similarly support a free-market sustem) must be held by much of the population.
Romans 13:1 Let every person be in subjection to the governing authorities. For there is no authority except from God, and those which exist are established by God.
You and I will have to agree to disagree on the meaning of "assist" - I think that is where we left it last time too.
Not legally.
Lest I establsh the FSM as a "higher authority."
Notice I said "if" the Catholic Church advocates violating the law. If they do not, then good for them. I certainly have nothing against Catholics per se. If certainly bishops advocate this, and their congregations follow, they are justifiably harming people's opinions of their congregations.
How quickly you forgot the analogy to "runaway slaves" from above : (
I don't even support most of the harsher measures against illegals advocated on FR, and could easily support a well-designed guest worker program. But if a law is passed and signed making it a felony to aid illegals, I believe Americans should obey that law.
That's right - the underground railroad should have only "given them food and turned them in" - good one.
Do you believe that illegal aliens are morally equivalent to runaway slaves?
Some are escaping from even harsher living conditions, both groups "broke the law" crossing over the border, but in general, no. Now, should the underground railroad have only "given them food and turned them in"?
Another question: are runaway slaves morally equivalent to unborn children?
I wonder how many of those who are pro-illegal are of the "chinese menu" christianity cult.
Man's laws are indeed often flawed, and what is fundamentally "moral" is subject to debate. I have yet to read any of the Catholic leaders who support illegal immigration assure us that the Catholic Church, and the Catholic Church alone, will bear the costs of the illegals, their "cause celebres". Therefore, they expect society to do so, whether society agrees or not. In my book, and in the Ten Commandments as well, that falls under the category of "Stealing". How about the Catholic Church effectively thumbing its nose at all those LEGAL immigrants waiting patiently in line to immgrate legally? Where are these church leaders speaking out against the body politic of Mexico for abandoning its people? Where's the "moral" outrage there? Taking the moral high ground is one thing, backing it up is quite another. I'm a Catholic, and I'm outraged at these arrogant hypocrites!
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.