You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Culture Wars
Cardinal Vows to Defy Anti-Immigrant Bill
2006-03-02
Los Angeles Cardinal Roger M. Mahony said Wednesday he would instruct his priests to defy a proposed federal requirement that churches check the legal status of parishioners before helping them.

The U.S. House of Representatives included the requirement in an immigration bill that the Senate Judiciary Committee is to begin debating this week. The legislation also would penalize social organizations that refuse to meet its requirements.

When asked if he would be willing to go to jail for the stance, Mahony said "yes" because "helping people in need were actions that are part of God's mercy."

Mahony, a longtime advocate of immigrant rights who oversees a racially diverse archdiocese of more than 4 million people, used Ash Wednesday and the beginning of the Lenten season to urge Catholics to "make room" for immigrants.

"Unless you are a Native American, everyone in here is the son or daughter of immigrants," said Mahony, speaking during Mass at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels.

Mahony told those attending Mass he was not in favor of "unfettered immigration," but that the current system was inhumane and inefficient. He said stringent laws and government bureaucracy meant immigrants were often separated up to 15 years from family members trying to immigrate.

"We need reform that looks to family unification," he said. "What we have now is broken and invites violation."

U.S. Roman Catholic bishops support a guest-worker program, legalizing undocumented immigrants and more visas for migrants' families.

Mahony has long advocated for immigrant rights and opposed the 1994 state proposition that tried to deny public benefits to illegal immigrants. The proposition was approved by voters but struck down by federal courts as unconstitutional.
It is not the business of churches to have to "check papers". It is also not the business of churches to facilitate additional lawbreaking. So it is acceptable for them to give to anyone who walks through their doors, but it is not acceptable for them to encourage the violation of US borders.
Posted by:Anonymoose

#12  The Dioceses of Los Angeles and San Bernardino are at the forefront of this 'social justice' issue. The good Cardinal and the bishops may be right in saying they are "not in favor of 'unfettered immigration'", but they're not far off from that stance.
Posted by: Pappy   2006-03-02 21:45  

#11  the church isn't a place for politics. If churches start/continue to push these views, they won't be non profit much longer.
Posted by: Jan   2006-03-02 21:09  

#10  As a Catholic, I agree with OS - MAhoney's presided over the silencing and transferring of unknown numbers of pedophile priests to unsuspecting parishes, smashing the lives of untold children. He should be run out of the Church on a rail and sent to prison for conspiracy and abetting crimes. Mahoney should just STFU about legalities and morality.
Posted by: Frank G   2006-03-02 20:31  

#9  Yer all squatters.
Posted by: .Alley Oop   2006-03-02 19:20  

#8  #5. MOJO, I doubt that he's a member of AIM and he never ever gets nasty about anything. Just an all round good guy.
Posted by: GK   2006-03-02 18:20  

#7  "We need reform that looks to family unification"

No problemo there yer holiness. How bouts they do there unifying in their "legal" country of origin.
Posted by: DepotGuy   2006-03-02 15:00  

#6  Its all PC in the name. NA came up because the Europeans had tagged the natives with a misapplied term thinking they [the Europeans] had made it to India. It had been used for hundreds of years, then the 60s and the victimization culture took hold and the PC police decided that it was an insult. Aboriginal-American wasn't classy enough I guess, but it does have that oh, so in ' - '.
Posted by: Chanter Cruger6161   2006-03-02 14:44  

#5  GK: Was/is your friend a member of AIM?

Lots of injuns prefer to be called American Indians. Some get downright nasty about it when you call them "native Americans", insisting their occupancy of the continent predates America.

Go figure.
Posted by: mojo   2006-03-02 13:43  

#4  Mahoney is a jackoff. He's one of the absolutely WORST Bishops in the US Catholic Church.

Posted by: OldSpook   2006-03-02 13:30  

#3  The catch here may be that the priests are helping parishioners with federal funds. If they won't enforce federal laws (which they ought not) then they shouldn't take federal funds (which they ought not). This has always been the downside of the faith based initiatives. He who pays the piper calls the tune. It's the Feds favorite way of taking over, offer cash then pull the strings.
Posted by: Nimble Spemble   2006-03-02 11:52  

#2  "Unless you are a Native American,..."
Perhaps at odds with Merriam-Webster, a Cherokee friend of mine insisted that he was an "American Indian". He further pointed out that anyone born in America is a native, thus a Native American. As further proof to his argument, he said look at the sign as you approach Cherokee, North Carolina. It reads "Indian Reservation" not "Native American Reservation".

I'm wondering if the Cardinal cannot render assistance to the governmaent without compromising his religious duties. As Jesus pointed out, “Give to worldly authorities the things that belong to them, and to God what belongs to God.”
Posted by: GK   2006-03-02 11:33  

#1   "Unless you are a Native American, everyone in here is the son or daughter of immigrants," said Mahony, speaking during Mass at the Cathedral of Our Lady of the Angels.

Well actually they are too. It's just that their ancestors are so far back that one could never trace their family tree. I agree that it is not the business of churchs to have to check residency papers but neither should they encourage or facilitate breaking the law. With one proviso, laws that seek to deny the rights of citizens and can be fought with civil disobediance ala the civil rights fights of the past.
Posted by: Cheaderhead   2006-03-02 10:15  

00:00