Five Reasons to Resist the U.S. Bishops on Immigration Reform

Most U.S. Catholic bishops stand "in solidarity with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and its many statements of the past decade in support of comprehensive immigration reform."  Perhaps the bishops hope that whatever influence they have among Catholics, they can use it to further another law that runs more than 1,200 pages.  Evidently, the bishops did not have enough betrayal with health care reform.

Here are five reasons why the U.S. bishops ought to change their mind about support for immigration reform.

ONE: The bishops have misled Catholics scripturally about immigration. There are many passages in the Bible that encourage us to welcome the stranger (Deuteronomy 10: 19, or Hebrews 13:1, among others).  None of these passages encourage us to welcome an invading army of poor people intent on bankrupting our health care system, debasing our schools, stealing our legal identities and our territory, diminishing our sovereignty, refusing to speak our language, using their children as human shields to stay in the United States, and destroying our neighborhoods.

Illegal immigration from Mexico, encouraged by the corrupt Mexican government, does all the above.  To hide these sinful activities by using quotations from the Bible about not welcoming strangers is misleading.  The illegal aliens coming to the United States are not strangers to be welcomed; they are an invading foreign army that has to be turned back.

There is much evidence that those who are in the United States illegally from Mexico and other countries are not assimilating or interested in becoming U.S. citizens.  The position of the U.S. bishops on immigration will end by dividing the United States into a Spanish-speaking and an English-speaking nation, creating more social unrest.

The late Professor Huntington of Yale University claims, "Mexican immigration poses challenges to our policies and to our identity in a way nothing else has in the past."  There is a world of difference between welcoming a stranger and welcoming an invading army of foreigners.

TWO: The U.S. bishops have misled Catholics morally in regard to illegal immigration.  The Catholic moral principle of subsidiarity requires us to recognize that solutions to the problems caused by illegal immigration are not always to be found on the national level, but rather on the level of the local community.

To solve Mexico's social problems, illegal immigrants must accept their moral responsibility of working to change conditions in their own countries (and not just Mexico).  U.S. Catholics, and especially the bishops, have the moral responsibility to encourage that return, and to administer charitable programs in Mexico that change conditions there.  To do otherwise is to encourage greed both in U.S. employers and in illegal aliens.  To do otherwise is to have the Church encourage sin.

Amnesty is not mercy.  Amnesty is to illegal immigration what enablers are to alcoholics.  Amnesty only gets more of the sin of illegal immigration.  Undocumented immigrants are citizenship thieves.  When someone steals your car, you do not dismiss his theft by calling it undocumented ownership.

Unfortunately, many bishops believe in "social justice" and what can be called the Babylonian Heresy*.  They have lost the traditional teachings of the Church in favor of contemporary meanings.  The consequence of their actions will be the creation of social upheaval instead of peace among nations.

THREE: Immigration in 2013 is not like immigration in 1895.  The U.S. immigration experience we read about in books like Upton Sinclair's The Jungle or Willa Cather's My Ántonia no longer apply.

The twenty-first century must not repeat the mistakes of the nineteenth century when it comes to immigration.  Mexico cannot solve its twenty-first-century social problems by exporting poverty to Chicago or Los Angeles.

FOUR: There are cultural differences between the United States and Mexico that are not dissolved by moving people across borders the way money is moved between banks.  In this regard, the Catholic Church has effected an incomplete cultural and religious conversion in Mexico.  The Church cannot resolve that incomplete conversion by preaching immigration reform to parishioners in the United States.

Because of cultural differences, many Mexican Catholics involved in the immigrant rights movement are Mexican Marxists.  They are not peace-loving and pious.

Look at the Mexican Revolution of 1910 or the drug cartels today as example of the incomplete conversion of Mexico to the teachings of Christ.  Do the U.S. bishops want to bring these bloody problems to U.S. cities?

The Catholic Church would do better if it had policies that completed the conversion of Mexico, and then went on to evangelize in the urban ghettos of Detroit or Chicago, among the most segregated cities in the United States.

FIVE: What is preventing U.S. bishops from realizing Catholic policies and social teaching when it comes to welfare and immigration?  The real answers to immigration and welfare have been in scripture and Catholic morality for centuries.

The fact of the matter is that U.S. bishops are in the thralls of the Democratic Party.  This enthrallment is the obstacle to true Catholic charity.  If  the U.S. bishops want Catholic immigration reform, then they must first have Catholic political reform.

The U.S. bishops must come to see that the Democratic Party stands for many things that Catholics know as sinful and damnable.  The bishops must be made to see how the traditional Catholics Democrats of their youth have become the same-sex-marriage Marxists of their old age.

Is this conversion away from the Democratic Party possible?  The political reality is that many Catholics bishops are liberals and progressives first, then Catholics second.

Many U.S. bishops have given their belief in immigration reform first to the Democratic Party and Babylonian Heresy, the heresy of our age, equal to the Arian Heresy of ages past.  They have become blind shepherds, who may lead their flock into the jaws of the wolf and not even know it.

*Those who hold to the Babylonian Heresy mistakenly teach that Christianity ends with the abolition of nations and the imposition of a New World Order.  This view is both theologically and scripturally wrong.  St. Thomas argues correctly that the nation is part of the natural social order and is necessary for a fully human life.  The Bible teaches us that nations will be with us until the end of time.

Most U.S. Catholic bishops stand "in solidarity with the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops and its many statements of the past decade in support of comprehensive immigration reform."  Perhaps the bishops hope that whatever influence they have among Catholics, they can use it to further another law that runs more than 1,200 pages.  Evidently, the bishops did not have enough betrayal with health care reform.

Here are five reasons why the U.S. bishops ought to change their mind about support for immigration reform.

ONE: The bishops have misled Catholics scripturally about immigration. There are many passages in the Bible that encourage us to welcome the stranger (Deuteronomy 10: 19, or Hebrews 13:1, among others).  None of these passages encourage us to welcome an invading army of poor people intent on bankrupting our health care system, debasing our schools, stealing our legal identities and our territory, diminishing our sovereignty, refusing to speak our language, using their children as human shields to stay in the United States, and destroying our neighborhoods.

Illegal immigration from Mexico, encouraged by the corrupt Mexican government, does all the above.  To hide these sinful activities by using quotations from the Bible about not welcoming strangers is misleading.  The illegal aliens coming to the United States are not strangers to be welcomed; they are an invading foreign army that has to be turned back.

There is much evidence that those who are in the United States illegally from Mexico and other countries are not assimilating or interested in becoming U.S. citizens.  The position of the U.S. bishops on immigration will end by dividing the United States into a Spanish-speaking and an English-speaking nation, creating more social unrest.

The late Professor Huntington of Yale University claims, "Mexican immigration poses challenges to our policies and to our identity in a way nothing else has in the past."  There is a world of difference between welcoming a stranger and welcoming an invading army of foreigners.

TWO: The U.S. bishops have misled Catholics morally in regard to illegal immigration.  The Catholic moral principle of subsidiarity requires us to recognize that solutions to the problems caused by illegal immigration are not always to be found on the national level, but rather on the level of the local community.

To solve Mexico's social problems, illegal immigrants must accept their moral responsibility of working to change conditions in their own countries (and not just Mexico).  U.S. Catholics, and especially the bishops, have the moral responsibility to encourage that return, and to administer charitable programs in Mexico that change conditions there.  To do otherwise is to encourage greed both in U.S. employers and in illegal aliens.  To do otherwise is to have the Church encourage sin.

Amnesty is not mercy.  Amnesty is to illegal immigration what enablers are to alcoholics.  Amnesty only gets more of the sin of illegal immigration.  Undocumented immigrants are citizenship thieves.  When someone steals your car, you do not dismiss his theft by calling it undocumented ownership.

Unfortunately, many bishops believe in "social justice" and what can be called the Babylonian Heresy*.  They have lost the traditional teachings of the Church in favor of contemporary meanings.  The consequence of their actions will be the creation of social upheaval instead of peace among nations.

THREE: Immigration in 2013 is not like immigration in 1895.  The U.S. immigration experience we read about in books like Upton Sinclair's The Jungle or Willa Cather's My Ántonia no longer apply.

The twenty-first century must not repeat the mistakes of the nineteenth century when it comes to immigration.  Mexico cannot solve its twenty-first-century social problems by exporting poverty to Chicago or Los Angeles.

FOUR: There are cultural differences between the United States and Mexico that are not dissolved by moving people across borders the way money is moved between banks.  In this regard, the Catholic Church has effected an incomplete cultural and religious conversion in Mexico.  The Church cannot resolve that incomplete conversion by preaching immigration reform to parishioners in the United States.

Because of cultural differences, many Mexican Catholics involved in the immigrant rights movement are Mexican Marxists.  They are not peace-loving and pious.

Look at the Mexican Revolution of 1910 or the drug cartels today as example of the incomplete conversion of Mexico to the teachings of Christ.  Do the U.S. bishops want to bring these bloody problems to U.S. cities?

The Catholic Church would do better if it had policies that completed the conversion of Mexico, and then went on to evangelize in the urban ghettos of Detroit or Chicago, among the most segregated cities in the United States.

FIVE: What is preventing U.S. bishops from realizing Catholic policies and social teaching when it comes to welfare and immigration?  The real answers to immigration and welfare have been in scripture and Catholic morality for centuries.

The fact of the matter is that U.S. bishops are in the thralls of the Democratic Party.  This enthrallment is the obstacle to true Catholic charity.  If  the U.S. bishops want Catholic immigration reform, then they must first have Catholic political reform.

The U.S. bishops must come to see that the Democratic Party stands for many things that Catholics know as sinful and damnable.  The bishops must be made to see how the traditional Catholics Democrats of their youth have become the same-sex-marriage Marxists of their old age.

Is this conversion away from the Democratic Party possible?  The political reality is that many Catholics bishops are liberals and progressives first, then Catholics second.

Many U.S. bishops have given their belief in immigration reform first to the Democratic Party and Babylonian Heresy, the heresy of our age, equal to the Arian Heresy of ages past.  They have become blind shepherds, who may lead their flock into the jaws of the wolf and not even know it.

*Those who hold to the Babylonian Heresy mistakenly teach that Christianity ends with the abolition of nations and the imposition of a New World Order.  This view is both theologically and scripturally wrong.  St. Thomas argues correctly that the nation is part of the natural social order and is necessary for a fully human life.  The Bible teaches us that nations will be with us until the end of time.

RECENT VIDEOS