Posted on 04/29/2010 10:34:06 AM PDT by Alex Murphy
The controversy over Arizona's immigration law should be used to highlight the shameful role of the Roman Catholic Church in facilitating the foreign invasion of the U.S.
This scandal deserves as much attention as the seemingly never-ending cases of sexual child abuse involving priests.
In a major embarrassment for followers of the U.S. Catholic Church, Cardinal Roger Mahony of Los Angeles compared Arizona's new law to "German Nazi and Russian Communist techniques." He actually wrote this on his personal blog, under the headline, "Arizona's Dreadful Anti-Immigrant Law."
Mahony is described by the Los Angeles Times as "a nationally influential figure who heads the nation's largest Roman Catholic archdiocese with 4.3 million members." In other words, he is not a fringe player. Indeed, he is typical of Catholic Church leaders.
Why do Catholic officials want to encourage illegal immigration? The answer is quite simple. Most of the illegal aliens are Catholics. Plus, the church makes lots of government money by hosting and serving the immigrants.
These facts are considered by some to be anti-Catholic, which is why you seldom read or hear about them in the major media. But the fact is that millions of American Catholics are disgusted and outraged by the Catholic hierarchy's statements and antics on this issue. They are organizing across the country.
James Russell, a Catholic who serves as National Secretary of Catholics for a Moral Immigration Policy, tells the story of betrayal of America by the Catholic Bishops in the book, Breach of Faith: American Churches and the Immigration Crisis.
In a major decision this week, the Supreme Court ruled that a Christian cross could remain on public land, despite the so-called separation of church and state. It has become a national controversy. But where is the debate or discussion over the Catholic Bishops getting $51 million a year from the government? A lot of that money is being used to cater to immigrants, legal and illegal. These immigrants, in turn, go to church, contribute to the collection plate, and vote the way the liberal priests and bishops dictate.
In short, the evidence shows that the Catholic Church hierarchy has become an agent of the government in facilitating a foreign invasion of the United States. There is no other way to describe it.
This explosive story of scandal and corruption must be told because "comprehensive immigration reform" cannot be defeated unless the role of the Catholic Church is exposed and addressed.
If you are in the market for more outrageous statements from Catholic officials, take a look at Russell's book, Breach of Faith. He notes that Cardinal Edward Egan of New York and Bishop Nicholas DiMarzio of Brooklyn supported and addressed a 2003 illegal alien "Freedom Riders" rally in Flushing Meadows Park in New York, "not far from the site where five illegal aliens had assaulted a woman and her boyfriend, then dragged her to a makeshift hut in the vicinity of Shea Stadium, where they repeatedly raped her and nearly beat her to death."
Russell formed the group, Catholics for a Moral Immigration Policy, in order to expose the Mahony-type characters in the church and church institutions.
In another book, On the Immorality of Illegal Immigration, also distributed by Catholics for a Moral Immigration Policy, Father Patrick Bascio notes that an estimated 70,000 criminal gang members have infiltrated U.S. cities. His book charges that Catholic Church leaders have aided and abetted "all the evils connected with illegal immigration" and have become corrupted in the process.
In going into detail about Catholic Church corruption on the immigration issue, Russell notes that the Catholic Campaign for Human Development (CCHD) promotes amnesty for illegal aliens through its funding of such groups as ACORN and the Catholic Legal Immigration Network (CLINIC). The CCHD is funded by ordinary parishioners asked to provide money to assist the poor.
He says one of many American Catholic Bishops who have "achieved notoriety" for pro-immigration activism is Gerald F. Kicanas of Tucson, Arizona, who solicits donations of cash and first-aid items for illegal aliens making their way into Arizona.
So the Catholic Church in Arizona has aided and abetted the problem that the citizens of Arizona, through their elected representatives, have now decided to confront. It is a major breakthrough.
Russell traces the church's involvement in the entry of illegal aliens into the U.S. to the Marxist-oriented "liberation theology" movement, also known as "social justice." Russell particularly faults Jesuit Catholic institutions such as Georgetown University for adopting this approach and indoctrinating students to be in favor of liberalized immigration policies.
Russell is honest about the motivation behind these efforts, noting that the Catholic Bishops and their agencies, some which get government money to provide services to illegal aliens, "benefit from immigration by increasing the number of Catholics in the United States."
He cites figures that most of the new immigrants to the United States are Catholics coming from Latin America.
He goes on, "When Catholic immigrants become naturalized, they may vote for candidates who support church policies." What's more, he writes, "The network of Catholic agencies relies on high rates of immigrants in need of social services to maintain government funding."
Many Americans don't realize that the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), which receives a federal tax exemption as a non-profit entity, gets one-third of its annual $146 million budget from the government.
"The USCCB is generally recognized as the single most active and most influential religious force for liberalization of American immigration policy, as well as for refugee resettlement, and hence merits our scrutiny," Russell writes.
Pastor Ralph Ovadal of Pilgrims Covenant Church in Monroe, Wisconsin, is also providing that scrutiny. Ovadal has been pointing out for years "that the Roman Catholic Church is aiding and abetting the criminal invasion of America from Mexico because the illegals are almost all Roman Catholics."
Ovadal says the leadership of the Roman Catholic Church is "looking to turn America, founded and still a Protestant country, into a Roman Catholic country."
These comments may sound harsh, but when a Catholic writer such as James Russell documents most of the information that lies behind such tough statements, one has to pay serious attention.
If anything, Russell writes, the position of the USCCB over the years has become more radical, to the point where the Bishops are emphasizing that amnesty for illegals-they call it "legalization"-has to be a "central component" of any federal immigration proposal.
Russell makes the case that current religious attitudes toward immigration "did not evolve slowly and authentically from traditional Christianity, but rather have been assiduously advanced by radical intellectuals, both Protestant and Catholic, whose goals have been primarily political, and have run counter to the best interests of the vast majority of native-born American citizens."
The hijacking of the Catholic Church by Marxist elements is now front and center. Who in the major media has the courage and guts to write about it?
Please note that observant “white” Catholics—and Mormons and Orthodox, supported McCain—at about the same rate. I am not so sure you should say that the “Catholics” in the North East or the Hispanics were much motivated by religion. The furor over the Arizona suggested that race was the driving force.
Yes, and secular authority tried to gain control over the church in the first three centuries A.D. too, didn’t it? What did the church do? The answer: she was martyred in her thousands. And the more that were killed the more rose up to take their place. Who won that conflict? Constantine decriminalized Christianity in 325 A.D. The state simply gave up in the face of what it could not understand and could not see and therefore could not defeat. But such is the way of God. He is a good and wise king, and a brilliant general, even though we usually do not understand or trust his strategy or tactics.
Do you not see that you make my point for me? The popes tried to win by using secular means in pursuit of secular ends that would benefit - or so they thought - the kingdom of God that is within each of us who believes. The popes left us with a mess bigger by far than the mess Obama is leading us into (and he is most certainly leading us into a mess!).
You said,
“The pope was the main organizer of resistence to the Muslims.”
... and wasn’t that a success? They are still here more than a thousand years later, more bitter and determined than ever, and they have learned to view the cross of Christ as the symbol of the blood-thirsty crusader. Far better it would have been to leave such things to the kings of those days and thus leave the skirts of the bride of Christ unsullied with the crimson stain of the work of the sword, an instrument God gave to the king, not to the church! Read Romans 13! Far better it would have been to leave the cross of Christ stained only with His blood.
Where would Western Civilization be without an institution and unifying center such as the Catholic Church to bring it together in religion, in it’s fight against the various invaders of the past.
It isn’t fair to compare different dark periods of Western history, the Church consists of humans, and humans are imperfect, have an organization for 1700 years and you will have fuel for every argument that you want to make, good or bad.
American slavery needs to be seen in it’s historical context, so do different periods of Church history, a person can’t jump around from century to century of world history and human behavior, and cultural and societal norms and constantly apply our current sensitivities to that era and then say “aha!” the Catholic Church!.
History isn’t over, Islam is here again, and a combination of the Catholic Church and meaty, American Protestant Christianity is needed to defeat it.
Those people that you dismiss are Catholics, and part of the Catholic vote and the Catholic faith.
Being white is not required.
ansel12 wrote:
“Where would Western Civilization be without an institution and unifying center such as the Catholic Church to bring it together in religion, in it’s fight against the various invaders of the past.”
I can see that you are an optimist. But the truth is that you don’t even know the answer to your own question. You assume that the answer would be that Western Civilization would be worse off. But, you know, you could very well be wrong, dead wrong. If the pope had simply followed the way of Christ, the way of the apostles, the way of the martyrs we so praise in the Te Deum Laudamus, maybe we would have won, just as we won over the pagan religion of the divine emperors of Rome. Don’t be so sure that you understand history better than God Himself.
In the same way, Obama is quick to ask where would we be if he hadn’t bailed out the banks (TARP ... and, yes, I know that happened on Bush’s watch, but with tremendous pressure from Obama and the Dems) and hadn’t stimulated the economy with $787,000,000,000. My answer to his question would be: maybe we would have been a helluvalot (this is kingdom-of-the-left phraseology, if you were wondering) better off than we are now.
“History isn’t over, Islam is here again, and a combination of the Catholic Church and meaty, American Protestant Christianity is needed to defeat it.”
To dream of the church defeating a faith, false as it is, with swords is just too sad for words. If this is your thinking and your strategy, we have already lost.
... and lest you think me a dreamy-eyed idealist and squishy pacifist, I give you this example from American history. Who beat the snot out of the Barbary pirates, John Adams or Thomas Jefferson? Why? Think before you answer.
Weird, that is internal to you, don't put your internal ideas on me.
"In the same way, Obama is quick to ask where would we be if he hadn’t bailed out the banks (TARP ... and, yes, I know that happened on Bush’s watch, but with tremendous pressure from Obama and the Dems) and hadn’t stimulated the economy with $787,000,000,000."
A 1700 year history fantasy rewrite, (which you did not fill in), and a Obama tie in.
I think I will pass on a your insights.
“I think I will pass on a your insights.”
That is your right, thank God, in this still free country.
It is also your right to decide not to ponder on history and the plain meaning of God’s word.
Politically, you and I are probably very close. But you have reached your position, at least in regard to Islam and what should be done by the threat is poses to a) the Christian Church and b) Western Civilization (these are separate questions), by quite a different path.
Oh, and I haven’t done a “1700 year history fantasy rewrite.” So, please, do not put such words into my mouth. I merely pointed out that if the popes had not presumed to be political leaders and generals and had merely remained the preachers and teachers of God’s word that they should have remained by calling and training, history would have turned out differently and, perhaps, much better. My only rationale for that suggestion is that doing God’s will has the benefit of going in the path of God. And He has a pretty good track record. But then, I am only a theologian, what do I know of history?
"To dream of the church defeating a faith, false as it is, with swords is just too sad for words. If this is your thinking and your strategy, we have already lost."
Stroke yourself all you want, but don't try and drag me into your closet.
In fact, I suspect that one thing that will calm these public demonstrations is a few well-placed admonitions to the leaders: You will be arrested and tried in a court of law. And Obammy can be impeached.
The war between the Muslims and the West has ebbed and flowed. The Turkish advance into Europe was halted at Vienna in the 1520s by the Hapsburgs. Their advance into the Western Mediterranean by the Knights of Malta and
a Christian fleet at Lepanto prevented an Turkish invasion of Italy in 1570. More than a hundreds years later, they were stopped before the gates of Vienna, where forces led by the king of Poland routed them, thus beginning the Christian reconquest of the Balkans. From 1698 to 1919, Islam was in constant retreat. Their resurgence during the last generation can be attributed to a loss of faith in Western Europe, not only in Christianity but in the future itself. The Pill seems to be the suicide pill of western civilization.
No, I don't think you have. There is a difference between the Democrat party of 1936 and the Democrat party of today. You are still ignoring my main point: that when the Democrat party embraced immorality, its Black chr*stian constituency did so also in lockstep. This is what I don't understand, not Black support for welfare or affirmative action (which aren't my issues anyway).
You are correct, and that baffles all of us, I'm always at a loss on trying to explain that, I have a sense that it isn't pretty and I'm glad that we never go down that road here.
I'm not sure what "road" you're talking about.
BTW: The last time the Catholics and "Protestants" (in this case Anglicans) united against a common enemy (the Puritans) it turned out disastrous for the Catholic Church.
The Catholic Church has been on the losing side of every political and cultural battle in the WEST since the Enlightenment. I hope this is NOT true on abortion.
I thought I was agreeing with that exactly, but I'm not going to waste anymore effort in trying to convince you of that.
The "road" is the in depth conversation about why blacks vote as they do, again, your lack of perception is a little amazing.
Liberalism and the Catholic voter is what makes us weak, get Catholics to become conservative and America wins.
Importing millions more liberal Catholics only spells doom for America and it always has been our downfall.
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.