Posted on 10/01/2010 1:49:32 PM PDT by Mrs. Don-o
The link is to East Tennessee Catholic, and the article I'm responding to is "Triptych of Love," by Richard Stika, Bishop of the Diocese of Knoxville. (When you use the link, you'll have to go to page 3; I don't know how to link there directly.)
The first half of Bishop Stika's article does a fine job of pointing out that the Biblical teaching of God's concern for "the widow, the orphan, and the stranger" can be applied in our day to the unmarried mother, the unborn child, and the immigrant. This much, I think, is true, accurate, and pastorally sensitive.
He runs into difficulties when he touts remittances, the transfer of funds from foreign workers in the US to their families back in Mexico and other home countries, as one of the positives of the present immigration situation.
"These remittances, collectively, represent the largest and most effective poverty-reduction program inthe world. When we attack the migrant, we increase poverty and take food from the hungry." |
Coming to the US without authorization is against the law; working here with a fake Social Security number is fraud; and yet Bishop Stika portrays cashing on millionfold lawbreaking and fraud as if it were a good thing.
And he runs into worse difficulties in his very next paragraph, in which he characterizes those opposed to this fraud as being moved by base motivations:
"But we are growing more fearful as a people and a society. When that hap[pens, as history demonstrates, the weakest and most vulnerable in a society are attacked. The slogans are familiar: fear of overpopulation, fear of lost autonomy, fear of the foreigner." |
Good as Bishop Stika's intentions may be --- and I am convinced that they are the best --- good intentions do not justify bad programs.
My letter follows.
God Save Arizona by Ray Stevens
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jWpOcZVnBrc
Giving it another bump: God Save Arizona
Thanks for the ping!
I've got to check out that book!
Thanks for the ping.
Thanks Mrs. Don-o.
A predicate for the Bishop’s perspective is that he likely joined a seminary at a young age and has been in the priesthood ever since. Not to discount his work or sacrifice, but he’s never had to work for a salary to make ends meet. He’s never had to produce a job, and meet a payroll; he’s never had to pay rent/mortgage or auto/maintenance/insurance or his own medical/dental, much less groceries, clothing and other necessities. The house (rectory) needs a new roof? Paid for. Need a new car? Paid for.
The ‘vow of poverty’ doesn’t include all those basic life costs incumbent on the rest of us. Economically speaking, it’s a socialistic lifestyle. The Church replacing the State in this case.
What the good Bishop doesn’t understand is that the ‘remittances’ that are allegedly decreasing poverty in other countries results in considerably less in the US taxpayers’ pockets. While illegals receive a lesser salary than a legal, they aren’t paying taxes at the federal, state or local level. Their children’s education and their families’ health care is all being paid by US taxpayers. Most of those students require extra educational costs, i.e., ESL.
Those workers who have ‘discretionary dollars’ to send ‘home’ are leaving the US taxpayers’ families with fewer and fewer discretionary dollars. And it is reaching critical mass with the burden on our educational, health and, yes, criminal institutions.
The US has to stop offering free services to anyone and everyone who manages to enter this country illegally. From anywhere. There was a program in place years ago whereby workers could come into the country during planting thru harvest season, and then would return home. They were offered wages, but not all the freebies now available that have served as nothing but a magnet for ever increasing unlawfulness and sapping of our national resources.
It’s time these ‘well meaning’ clergy and others learn the difference between being charitable (with other peoples’ money) and being foolish.
I admit I’ve not read the rest of the story - did John 10:1 enter into the discussion?
What would countries do if we cut off the monetary spigot they drink from? We give increable amounts of monies to other countries and yet they dare to consistantly knock how selfish we are...directly and indirectly. When are the illegal immagrants going to blame their own country for their lot in life. We do not cause the poverty in their country...their Government and people do. Most are terribly corrupt beyond measure. So put the blame where it belongs. Any Pastor, Priest, or religious leader who supports illegal immigration has forgotten that Christ is very clear about taking care of your own so that you can then take care of others. Family comes to mind. Sending monies to other countries simply supports the corrupt Gov. they have elected for themselves. It's just another way the world expects the USA to spread their wealth around...but the people don't get it...the corruptive leaders do.
Thanks for the recommendations!
There are four pillars of strength in any productive function society, political, economic, education, and religious. At any time any one or more of these institutions deem them self as origin of giving and or taking the basic fundamental rights solely owned by the Creator there will be a crumbling of that productive society.
The Creator set in stone laws to live by to receive His blessing and protection. These laws are still in effect regardless of what modern education claims either through philosophy of the political, economic, educational, or religious systems... Goes against the Creator and suffer.
It is against the Creator to use His own WORD to set up man's system of social justice when that system makes theft of the citizenry as not just acceptable but the primary functioning of their social justice system.... That simply is NOT charity it steals from the producers and from the recipients.
You are correct. I really don't want someone from a tax exempt organization advocating such force.
There’s a new defiant attitude sweeping across America.
You could say it’s Rebel Rouser’ time:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ki1hUuK_68E
You’re absolutely right when you say the benefits and publicly funded services offered to illegals serve as a powerful incentive for more and more unlawful entry. “If we can just get there, our kids will get public school and medical help and even in-state tuition at the state university!” Who wouldn’t come for that?
But as you said, it’s hard for the Bishop to see that this “charitable” approach is based on MASSIVE fraud -— accessing goods and services and financial resources to which are actually not entitled: that’s fraud, that’s embezzlement, that’s corruption -— and will ultimately break down the whole system. California is already bankrupt.
And then: misery for all. Including the illegals. And their next-of-kin down in Michoacan. And the Bishop. And all the rest of us.
It matters not that he is a Bishop... he is a world leftist communista first... his kind (being a leftist, he supports people like chavez and ortega etc... his actions support them in any case) have caused the deaths of thousands upon thousands in Central America alone. satan is the leader of the left and he corrupts these people with his evil... and the left is pure evil.
LLS
Keep up the good work and thanks for the book recomendation. I enjoy your dialogues so keep me on your ping list.
Thanks for your good work, Mrs. Don-o. I should take the time to list all posters...instead I’ll ping a couple of posters and BUMP-TO-THE-TRUTH for a great thread.
Words and deeds. Question everything and everyone.
This kind of loose accusatory talk is a product of rash judgment. I will defend Bishop Stika from rash judgment on exactly the same terms as I would defend you, LLS. I must insist that you refrain from such baseless slanders in the future.
Thank you very much.
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.