Rorate Caeli

Catholics and Politics
Papal Reminders: Immigration - I


The evangelist Matthew narrates that shortly after the birth of Jesus, Joseph was forced to leave for Egypt by night, taking the child and his mother with him, in order to flee the persecution of king Herod (cf. Mt 2:13-15). Making a comment on this page of the Gospel, my venerable Predecessor, the Servant of God Pope Pius XII, wrote in 1952: “The family of Nazareth in exile, Jesus, Mary and Joseph, emigrants and taking refuge in Egypt to escape the fury of an evil king, are the model, the example and the support of all emigrants and pilgrims of every age and every country, of all refugees of any condition who, compelled by persecution and need, are forced to abandon their homeland, their beloved relatives, their neighbors, their dear friends, and move to a foreign land” (Exsul familia, AAS 44, 1952, 649).

Toward the end of the 19th century, when the social means of prosperity became available to the poor in a man­ner previously unknown, great waves of people left Europe and moved especially from Italy to America. As usual the Catholic Church devoted special effort and care to the spiritual welfare of these emigrants. ... The record of our predecessor Leo XIII provides clear evidence of the Holy See's diligent solicitude, a solicitude which became more ardent as public officials and private institutions seemed the more dilatory in meeting the new needs. Leo XIII not only upheld vigorously the dignity and rights of the working man but also defended strenuously those emigrants who sought to earn their living abroad.
...

We wrote specifically on this subject in a letter of December 24, 1948 to the American Bishops:

You know indeed how preoccupied we have been and with what anxiety we have followed those who have been forced by revolutions in their own countries, or by unemployment or hunger to leave their homes and live in foreign lands.

The natural law itself, no less than devotion to humanity, urges that ways of migration be opened to these people. For the Creator of the universe made all good things primarily for the good of all. Since land everywhere offers the possibility of supporting a large number of people, the sovereignty of the State, although it must be respected, cannot be exaggerated to the point that access to this land is, for inadequate or unjustified reasons, denied to needy and decent people from other nations, provided of course, that the public wealth, considered very carefully, does not forbid this.
...
In these addresses and in our radio talks, we have condemned severely the ideas of the totalitarian and the imperialistic state, as well as that of exaggerated nationalism.
...
We expressed the same view in our Christmas Address of 1948. It is better, we said, to facilitate the migration of families into those countries able to provide them with the essentials of life, than to send foodstuffs at great expense to refugee camps.

Therefore, when Senators from the United States, who were members of a Committee on Immigration, visited Rome a few years ago, we again urged them to try to administer as liberally as possible the overly restrictive provisions of their immigration laws.

Pius XII
Apostolic Constitution Exsul Familia

49 comments:

bjr said...

We in the US also ask, that our national borders be respected and that, in the interest of our already liberal "welcome", we are not used in a selfish or superficial manner by those who come to this country, not as refugees in need of aid, but as users of our resorces for their own benefit and to our detriment.

We ask that illegal immigration for this purpose be stopped and that the Holy See must also tell those who migrate to other countrires to respect the laws, ways, traditions of their host country and refrain from insult, crime, usery, and the disrespectful treatment of the citizens of the host country.

America has always been a country of welcome. But when those we welcome refuse to come legally and go when it is time, then we have a responsiblity to ourselves as a country to enforce our laws for the good of our own country and the protection of those who have obeyed the laws. This keeps good order and kind hearts.

bjr

Joe B said...

OK, you asked for it.

Today, this is a joke. What barriers are there?

We have always taken in refugees like Joseph and Mary, fleeing for their lives from evil governments. We have lots of them. But these aren't refugees. It appears most of them come here nowadays mainly for the welfare benefits - free medical care, social security checks, education, and other benefits especially but not exclusively claimed by virtue of an anchor baby. There have always been some who came here just for the work and who were overall a very positive addition to American society, but the huge influx didn't start until these social benefits were extended to extra-nationals. Now they are a national security threat (I've read that 40% of the felons in our prisons are illegal aliens, not to mention the drug traffic problem and the terrorist threat due to the open border).

Mexico is a total mystery to most Americans, but especially to me since I'm Catholic and I can't for the life of me figure out why people who are 95% Catholic keep on electing (by free choice, mind you) a government that is hostile to the Catholic faith. We're talking about a democracy there, for goodness sake. I expect better of Catholics. And don't blame the masons or America, because a free election is a free election. You get what you ask for.

Jacob said...

What bjr said is absolutely true. The US allows in every year more legal immigrants than all other countries on earth combined. We do what we can to help those who enter legally and with legitimate need for refuge.

John said...

What is the point of this post? I think few Americans today desire no immigration or excessive restrictions. The issue of today is of law - illegal vs legal immigration. Is it just for an immigrant to enter any country and immediately ignore the laws of the land? Is it unjust for a nation to establish a legal process for people entering its borders? Is this burdensome or restrictive? Immigrants come to the USA to work. Legal immigrants receive wages and pay taxes. Illegal immigrants receive wages, but pay no taxes. Yet both receive the same gov't benefits. Is this just? What do you think Pope Pius XII would say to the Catholics of Mexico on this issue?

New Catholic said...

The point of this post is to present Papal positions on the issue, particularly regarding the unchanging principles of Natural Law applicable to various kinds of refugees and also to individuals and families that migrate due to economic need.

Jordan Potter said...

You have to wonder, given Church teaching and the dictates of natural law, if the words "illegal immigration" have any meaning. I'm not sure the State has the right to prevent people from entering the country due to economic need or even the mere desire for a better life.

Anonymous said...

Does that include Moslems? Every country has the right to decide who comes into it based upon their ability to fit and and not cause social disharmony. The best place to help immigrants is by removing the cause of immigration, poverty, war, disease etc in their own country. In the meantime hospitality and charity does not mean permanet immgration particularly if the aim is spreading a lie that is Islam. For this reason the Catholic Church was able to stop Islam from enetering Europe. Read this well know mainstream English newspaper
http://www.express.co.uk/posts/view/32867/Europeans-think-Islam-is-dangerous

dcs said...

I agree that the State doesn't have the right to hamper immigration in any way. On the other hand, property owners do have the right to keep trespassers off their land, and it seems reasonable that the public ought to decide to do with land that is publicly owned.

But really, the problem isn't illegal immigration, the problem is the welfare state and the public ownership of property.

Anonymous said...

Isn't it also a sin to break the laws of a country, and enter into a country illegally?

schoolman said...

"Isn't it also a sin to break the laws of a country, and enter into a country illegally?"
===================

Generally speaking the answer is "yes". But in cases of genuine NEED then the positive law of the state must give way to higher laws.

Jordan Potter said...

Yes -- it's the same principle that it's not stealing if you take bread without paying for it so your children won't starve.

Jeff said...

Good, good, good for you, New Catholic!

God bless you.

The Catholic Church is and has always been on the side of immigration governed by principles of humanitarianism and generosity and not selfish clannishness and hoarding.

We can take SO MANY MORE. Shame on us.

Anonymous said...

I have never liked Pius XII

LeonG said...

How difficult it is for the affluent to enter into Heaven.

Apiarius said...

Thank you, New Catholic. The comments demonstrate how necessary it is for Catholics to actually know what the Church's position has been on this issue from even before Vatican II.

We must beware of the temptation to be as selfish in immigration laws as others are in abortion laws. The quotations presented are not about the issue of crime but about immigration. Crime is another issue, and a very serious one, but to make a necessary link between immigration and crime here is to tell the sociologists they are right in saying that large families breed crime and poverty. Let us help our enemy, modernist social engineering. The Germanic tribes that wrecked Rome became its best defenders and made the Middle Ages.

Apiarius said...

Sorry!! I meant let us NOT help our enemy!

Stanislas said...

Please note that Pope Pius XII (venerable) was speaking notably about those forced out by Communism (threat of death), by a mixture of Communism and Nationalism (like the 14 million innocent Germans from formerly eastern German provinces now part of the Polish territory), the Heimatvertriebenen of Germany. Nowadays however, empty lands are not really there, and there is no obligation to let in economic immigrants who would not die or immensely suffer in health if they stayed in their native lands. Instead, modern mass emigration for economical reasons and internationalism cannot be defended by referring to Pius XII. We must help the Sudan refugees and the Palestinians, and the Bangladesh people, but immigration allowing is not a solution. We should rather work to restore the situation in the native lands of these refugees. And I see no moral obligation to let in hordes of economic immigrants merely for wealth reasons, who would not live in life-threatening circumstances at home, or in disease. Unrestrained immigration cannot be defended by Benedict XVI ever. It destabilizes the other country. Like Aristotle teaches, a nation can only take up 5 % of its total population as refugees and immigrants, not more, as then the people's character will be lost and stability too due to ethnic conflict. We see the same today in mass immigration. The pontiff probably knows Aristotle.

And the saintly Pope Pius XII never intended to bless massive economic immigrations "good luck immigration" into already occupied lands like the USA. I mean, the U.S. of 1880 cannot be compared to the U.S. of now. And our Europe is already being destabilized and its culture irreversibly changed due to massive Islamic and African immigration into it. And more come everyday. I think indigenous cultures, both in Africa and in Europe, have rights of their own too. This has nothing to with selfishness, but with identity and stability. I do not plead against missionary economic aid and political and social aid to Third World countries at all. But I do oppose Arabs and Africans immigrating massively into Europe, building large mosques in Rome and giving Freemasonic governments a reason to argument against the solitary and sole unique position of the Catholic Church even in countries like Spain and Italy. Pius XII was speaking about war victims, of a world war. I also think we should aid African war victims from e.g. Sudan. But in Tshad or Egypt, the neighbouring countries, not 5,000 kms northward in luxurious Europe per se. Pius XII spoke of intra-European (mostly temporal) refugees still bound to their native soil. Not about economic emigrants seeking good luck and better social welfare in other states 10,000 kms away from here. States have the right to regulate immigration rates, in order to guarantee state stability. Immigrants are mostly nót necessary refugees. And what Darfur refugee could ever afford to pay a plane ticket anyway?

Anonymous said...

I think this is taken out of context. This document was written within the context of post WWII where very large numbers of people (millions)were displaced after the war. Where could they go when communism occupied their countries?
Clearly there are conditions. For example one does not let immigrants come if they are going to overthrown your government or destroy your culture or spread a false religion. One would help but prohibit undesirable behaviour.
Obviously in countries where the Catholic Faith is a minority the situation is one of tolerance. In a Catholic Country one could not permit immigration that would spread false religion or overthrow the status quo.
An enemy within the gates is even more dangerous!!

Stanislas said...

The naive pro-Immigration Internationalists among you, who illusionarily think of the world as "one government", should notice that the popes speak about those who leave their countries (for neighbouring states mostly, not for 6,000 kms distanced luxurious European states like Norway, Germany and UK) due to FORCE, being FORCED to leave their home due to need (hunger, famine) or violence (war). Of course we must aid and help such refugees, especially the rich, decadent West and its spoilt citizens. Of course. But Mexican immigrants who illegally cross the border, or rich Africans trying to come into Europe to earn more, or Moroccan immigrants marrying to a "European" Islamic ancient immigrant in order to gain access to Holland or France, are nót forced by need or violence, they are not emigrating due to force pushing them. Economic immigrants are not allowed by these papal teachings to travel anywhere they like to try their luck. I would host Albanian or Bosnian or Serbian refugees from Yugoslavia during their civil wars, but why should we host Zimbabwe citizens or Tanzanians if South Africa can do so too? What Tanzanian refugees can afford a $ 1,200 plane flight anyway? Is that due to "need", necessity or "violence", and are such people "forced"?

We must aid refugees, immigrants forced out of their home countries. Not necessarily all luck seekers, and certainly not over 5 % of the native population (see Aristotle).

Gregor Kollmorgen said...

It is amazing how people who otherwise consider themselves "traditionalists" are willing to simply brush away traditional teaching of the Church when it comes into conflict with their preconceived political ideas and the risk of diminishing the welfare level of their country. While the popes obviously do not say that all immigrants must alway be accepted whatever the circumstances, that indeed there are reasons for not admitting them, they stress that these reasons be considered very carefully, and that immigration for economic reasons cannot be refused per se. We have to be willing to see the wealth of our own countries diminished to help the poor. That is a hard teaching, and apparently, like in the Gospel, many cannot bear it.

Regarding Mexico, it is hardly fair to say that the elections before the 1990s have been free, when everything was controlled by the PRI in a system that may be called electorally authoritarian. And the last two presidents (Fox and Calderón) are both practicing Catholics. Calderón had the opposition to abortion, euthanasia, contraconception and homosexual marriage in his electoral programme.

Jordan Potter said...

The naive pro-Immigration Internationalists among you, who illusionarily think of the world as "one government",

I doubt there are any internationalists who think of the world as one government who frequent this weblog.

I would observe that it's never a good idea for the State to criminalise things that aren't crimes. Such laws are unenforceable -- which is why there are so many illegal immigrants in this country. But immigration, of itself, is not only not a crime, but is a basic human right. That doesn't mean the State has no interest in impeding the entry into the country of those who would do harm. But if someone is looking for a better life for himself or his family, we ought to welcome him.

Joe B said...

Emotion-driven dreamers - these aren't Josephs and Marys. As soon as they can vote, these idiots vote overwhelmingly pro-abort, pro-homosexual, anti-God Democrat just to get the handouts our socialist party buys voters with. They sell their souls for handouts.

Let the good ones in and keep the bad ones out? Hello - how are you going to sort them out? That's the whole issue, dreamers.

Build the fence, then sort them out according to publicly approved policy. In the meantime, stop the non-pay social benefits and they'll leave on their own. In fact, they're already doing that by the tens of thousands now that employers are insisting on valid social security numbers. Now all we have to do is control the uncontrolled influx. And our emotion-driven dreamers.

Catholic social teaching wasn't intended to be a contract for national suicide. You dreamers are interpreting it to suit your emotions.

Anonymous said...

The situation of massive immigration, as someone mentioned is due to social engineering. There are filthy rich,powerful elite who benefit from this influx; this to further fill their coffers AND TO WEAKEN THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. Take a world view of the situation and recognize the enemy.

The attack is world-wide. Take pity on the poor countries who are suffering the brunt of the attacks, especially the Catholic countries. Into Catholic countries, there has been a concerted effort to destroy the Faith by the LEGAL entry of protestant sects. (As planned by the Rockefeller Foundation) This destabilizes what was once Catholic society, resulting in more sin, more crime and all kinds of social ills. Into Catholic countries, LEGALLY, Planned Parenthood has been spreading its diabolical venom. Influences from America, of some wicked people, are responsible for-- not killing bodies-- but souls!

American Capitalistic ventures are ruthless in their quest for open markets. KFC, Walmart, Goodyear, Ford; they hire cheap labor in a poor host country while making big buck for themselves, most of which finds its way back to the United States.

At the same time, illegal immigration is --yes--encouraged by these powerful and influential elite to garner cheap labor here in the US. So, if you are a poor Mexican, you lose, here or in your own country. This is the plan of atheistic Masonic forces. Keep the people poor, and you can control them. Think about it. And because such wicked people care neither for their own countrymen, don't think that Americans are excluded from the plan to be subjugated by economic need.

The enemy is not your fellow Catholic no matter how he got here.

Patrick said...

Thank goodness there is at least ONE american traditionalist Catholic that takes the Church's position on immmigration seriously. Most are like Pat Buchanan and do not. Kudos to New Catholic on this one.

Jordan Potter said...

Catholic social teaching wasn't intended to be a contract for national suicide. You dreamers are interpreting it to suit your emotions.

On the contrary, it's your comments that I find to be emotional and that display dismissive contempt for those who do not share your opinions, with little if any substantive interaction with the objective teachings of the Church on this matter.

John said...

Still there are too many red herrings in this blog stream. The current immigration issue in the USA is strictly legal vs illegal immigration. It has nothing to do with the right of people to immigrate. No one posting in this blog appears to be opposed to immigration. If anything, it has to do with the right of the state to tax its citizens. The state is a Good. To provide its good services, it requires revenues. The usual means of acquiring such revenues is through taxation. Illegal immigrants do not pay taxes, yet they still enjoy the goods of state services. Meanwhile, the legal immigrants (and those born here) pay the taxes that provide such services. This is the only immigration issue in the USA. The very reason why the state establishes immigration laws is to record the existence of these people for taxation purposes, same as the rest of us.

Unless you address this issue - illegal immigrants avoiding taxation - then you are engaged in a red herring.

Jordan Potter said...

The current immigration issue in the USA is strictly legal vs illegal immigration. It has nothing to do with the right of people to immigrate.

If people as a rule have a right to immigrate, then the State shouldn't have immigration policies that place so many immigrants in the category of "illegal."

If anything, it has to do with the right of the state to tax its citizens.

Immigrants, whether legal or illegal, are not citizens unless and until naturalised. But even non-citizens have to pay taxes. Indeed, anyone who lives in a country pays at least some taxes and duties and fees: unless they limit themselves to the black market, they have to pay sales taxes and other duties.

Anonymous said...

"Illegal" (undocumented) immigrants certainly pay some taxes... And if taxation is the main problem, may the State apply a new amnesty or semi-amnesty and provide a path for citizenship. Wait, that was more or less what our current pro-life President wanted to do, but was blocked by the new Nativists...

beng said...

Emotion-driven dreamers - these aren't Josephs and Marys. As soon as they can vote, these idiots vote overwhelmingly pro-abort, pro-homosexual, anti-God Democrat just to get the handouts our socialist party buys voters with. They sell their souls for handouts.


Two wrongs don't make a right is a Christian principle.


Is this prinsiple going to be abandoned like the immigration teaching by the popes for the sake of one's own welfare?


Ahh.... the road to salvation is indeed narrow.

sean said...

Persecution is so much abused as a ground for immigration that it is has lost all meaning. As for the desire to better oneself that is clearly a want and not a need. Immigration s a human right? Some people need a reality check.

beng said...

The right to immigrate is written on Gen 1:28-30

Jordan Potter said...

Immigration is a human right?

Yes, that is what the Church teaches. The right to migrate is a basic human right, like the right to food, water, and shelter.

Listen to St. Peter -- he was appointed to strengthen us in the faith.

Anonymous said...

Sorry, but I can't agree with some of these "traditionalists" who like to quote the scripture and the encyclical to justify the invasion from the south.

Yes, Americans are, for the most part immoral, without God, selfish and self-centered, but why does that mean we need so-called Catholics from Mexico (who are no more Catholic than let's say Italians) will do any good for America. And some say they have a right, you know what right supercedes that? The right of self-preservation.

I don't know how many, who support the illegal, live in neighborhoods that have been overwhelmed by the illegal, but I wonder if they would think the same thoughts if they did. Yes, call me selfish, call me racist, call me whatever you want, but the pipe dreams of those that think the Mexican will teach the American how to be Catholics is just that a pipe dream.

Sorry, but I cannot see how what Pope Pius XII or Pope Benedict has said applies to the situation here in the US. The Mexican needs to do something to fix his country, but he finds it easier to come here and take what is not his and live off the earnings of others and the self-imposed guilt of Americans.

Caritas said...

"Emotion-driven dreamers - these aren't Josephs and Marys. As soon as they can vote, these idiots vote overwhelmingly pro-abort, pro-homosexual, anti-God...

Thou hypocrite, cast out first the beam out of thy own eye, and then shalt thou see to cast out the mote out of thy brother's eye.

Caritas

Caritas said...

Thank you New Catholic for this beautiful post. We are truly blessed with our Pope. He is promoting Truth which can only lead to Charity.

Though, when reading some of the posts it really felt as pearls before swine. Let us pray for their conversion...but let us also especially pray for those , in the desert or by sea, risking their lives, at this very momemt, for a better life.

Providence never fails!

Caritas

beng said...

Sorry, but I can't agree with some of these "traditionalists" who like to quote the scripture and the encyclical to justify the invasion from the south.

So, invasion is a bad thing then?


Then maybe, for a start, one should give back California to the Mexican and all its economic and technological adavantages (of course with all its liberal hollywood-esque disadvantages).


One wonder, if a Mexican choose to reside in California can that really be considered as immigration? Is going back to one's fatherland can be considered immigration? Don't answer that.

Anonymous said...

The USA is a nation of immigrants. Why do you fear Mexicans? As a Catholic I have more in common with Mexicans than with WASPS. Catholics should favour Catholic immigration and not other groups who do not compliment a Catholic society. Ottaviani, of course, had published a standard text, Institutiones Juris Publici Ecclesiastici, which defended a traditional Catholic position that “error had no rights” and that the state had an obligation (where Catholics were in a majority) to recognize Catholicism as the established religion and merely tolerate private religious acts of non-Catholics. Non-Catholic public displays or witnessing to their “errors” could and should be curtailed. Where Catholics were a minority,(ie countries like the USA) as a kind of hypothesis, religious pluralism could be tolerated as a lesser evil. Ottaviani presented this argument as an accurate reflection of the forceful rejection of separation of church and state and religious liberty expressed in the encyclical of Pius IX, The Syllabus of Errors and Benedict XIV’s Quanta Cura.
Surely as a lesser evil one tolerates none Catholic immigration in a Catholic country. In a non Catholic country according to civil good and groups that do not fit in or represent a public threat (Islam) are excluded!

sean said...

I take it that Jordan Potter heartily applauds the influx of mohammedans and animists into Europe because it is their 'right' to wander wherever they please. Listen here Jordan, I am coming over to Canada and I shall be staying at your house. I require a double room and a breakfast of bacon, sausage and egg each morning! Free of charge!

Dymphna said...

The United States is not a nation of immigrants. That is sentimental cadswallop. Our ancestors may have come from Europe but we are Americans. I do not pine for West Africa or Ireland and I do not feel the need to recreate the worst of both places here in America.
There are places in my town where I no longer go because nobody speaks English there and the people actually stare and make obscene gestures at non Hispanics. Oh and last year we had two machete attacks. Latin gang activity has come to my once quiet Southern town. Am I bound, as a Catholic to cheer this?

Joe B said...

John said, "The current immigration issue in the USA is strictly legal vs illegal immigration. It has nothing to do with the right of people to immigrate. No one posting in this blog appears to be opposed to immigration."

The first two points are spot on, John, but there are definitely entries here arguing for an absolute right to cross borders without any respect for justice, law, self defense, or protection of the one true faith. Might as well be talking to a computer screen as to mention the word illegal to them. There's something about that word they just will not hear, isn't there?

beng said...

Sean:

take it that Jordan Potter heartily applauds the influx of mohammedans and animists into Europe because it is their 'right' to wander wherever they please.


Actually, IF TREATED CORRECTLY, having influx of Mohammedan is a good thing for a Catholic country.

What we should do then is MAKE them Catholics. Not by force, but by various means in consonant with Catholic teachings.

It's better to try to convert someone in our homeground than to try convert someone at their homeground.

The problem with Europe is that they let moslem be moslem (not that we should force them to apostasized from their faith, but we should "conditioned" them so that they would convert on heir own free will).




Sean:
I require a double room and a breakfast of bacon, sausage and egg each morning! Free of charge!

Ahhh strawman. The tool used by Jack Chick and most third rated Protestant aologists. Attacking the caricature instead of the real thing.

Anonymous said...

I have no problem with immigration for the purpose of improving one's condition, freeing oppression, or obtaining religious freedom.
However, it's obvious that the Vatican has no clue about the true "immigration" that is currently occurring.
I live in the US in a state that borders Mexico. Every day I see the effects of this "immigration." Every day crime increases. Almost daily you hear about the illegal immigrant who killed someone, etc. Gangs of illegal immigrants live here, stealing vehicles for drug running etc.
Immigration today isn't about a better life. It's about extending the reach of evil to corrupt every inch of this earth. Even the well-intentioned "immigrants" from Central and South America, bring further destruction to my country with their filthy magazines, television shows and lifestyles. They can hardly be compared to Jesus, Mary, and Joseph.
The US is bad enough, but Europe is a nightmare, with Muslims "peacefully" overtaking the continent and converting everything to their use and way of life. This is what many Christians fought and died for to prevent. Were they wrong? Should they have allowed Muslims to freely enter and take over their countries.
These days are not the days of Pope Pius XII. The Vatican needs to wake up and realize what goes on in the real world, before they further fuel this movement of corruption.

Caritas said...

"It's better to try to convert someone in our homeground than to try convert someone at their homeground. The problem wth Europe..."

Unfortunately, there will soon remain very little to convert to.

The proplem with Europe is that most countries are rapidly developing into post-Christian societies.

St. Benedict ora pro nobis.

Caritas

Caritas said...

"However, it's obvious that the Vatican has no clue about the true "immigration" that is currently occurring."

Maybe, maybe not...God Bless America!

Did you know? United Nations reports that in 2005 there were 190M international immigrants in the world. 20% of which are in the USA.

Below the Top 10 distribution in %:

United States 20.2
Russian Federation 6.4
Germany 5.3
France 3.4
Canada 3.2
India 3.0
United Kingdom 2.8
Spain 2.5
Australia 2.2

Providence never fails!

Caritas

Anonymous said...

nobody can criticize a migrant who only wants to improve his life. most of the illegals are poor. as catholics, we must protect and help the poor. also there is the issue that they do pay taxes and by in large, we need them to pick vegetables. therefore, they deserve benefits. you can't have it both ways. Jesus will judge us according to how we treat the poor.

that being said, the problem of massive illegal immigration and its negative effects are the result of globalism and capitalism. economics as practiced here is blind to justice, profit is the bottom line. why pay an american a high wage when you can pay an illegal much much less.

in the end, the global elites only want more power and wealth. they want the u.s. to become a third world country to compete economically with china. there will only be the few rich, and the mass of poor, like in mexico.

don't blame the illegals for this mess; blame our materialistic hedonistic secular culture and government.

Anonymous said...

nobody can criticize a migrant who only wants to improve his life. most of the illegals are poor. as catholics, we must protect and help the poor. also there is the issue that they do pay taxes and by in large, we need them to pick vegetables. therefore, they deserve benefits. you can't have it both ways. Jesus will judge us according to how we treat the poor.

that being said, the problem of massive illegal immigration and its negative effects are the result of globalism and capitalism. economics as practiced here is blind to justice, profit is the bottom line. why pay an american a high wage when you can pay an illegal much much less.

in the end, the global elites only want more power and wealth. they want the u.s. to become a third world country to compete economically with china. there will only be the few rich, and the mass of poor, like in mexico.

don't blame the illegals for this mess; blame our materialistic hedonistic secular culture and government.

Anonymous said...

Very odd discussion, America which is country made up entirely of immigrants! California, in particularly places close to Mexico, such as San Diego, with Mexico just across the river, is filled with Mexicans, hotels employees are almost 100% Mexicans, they are everywhere, and San Diego did not seem to be crime filled bad place. Nor Houston. Immigrants take jobs Americans would not take and as with every immigrant population there are good decent people and some much less decent, nothing new about it. On the other hand, America suffered most from the hands of those who came there lawfully to get some training at colleges and in the meantime designing and putting into practice some deadly plots with planes full of passengers hitting Pentagon, New York towers....

New Catholic said...

The frightful increase of this immigrant population began in 1837 and 1840, when the first movement of the native American organizations originated; but not until 1846 had the Irish and German rush to our shores become a startling and terrible calamity.

At least four-fifths ofthese aliens are driven to our shores by the persecution of Papal despots, whose propensity to browse in American pastures is made delicious by their starving, loathsome condition in their native lands. Bishop [John Joseph] Hughes [o New York] states that the average amount of money they bring is fifteen dollars! By the report of the British Immigration Commissioner, in May, '55, these immigrants had remitted to Europe, through bankers and merchants alone, $28,948,800 in five years, beside large amounts by various private sources. This was one million of dollars over and above what their pious Archbishop asserts they had upon landing upon our soil.

From whence was this money obtained but from Americans? Who maintains these paupers but Americans? Who feeds and educates their children but Americans? And yet native political Jesuits impudently assert that this scum of European masses enhances our wealth and confers upon us advantages which demand our gratitude!

Judge, my countrymen, for yourselves.

The American colonies protected themselves by law from these foreign paupers and criminals at their earliest formation. In Virginia they had a capitation tax on Irish servants who immigrated to that colony. In Pennsylvania it was placed on criminals. ...

Two bills were reported by a select committee, July 2d, 1838, to revise the Naturalization Laws, when a Mr. Beatty, a naturalized citizen of Pennsylvania, interposed objection, and by stratagem, and tergiversation, and political selfishness, the effort was abortive.

Evidence of this increasing invasion upon American nationality and defiant disregard for the will of the American people, was furnished from month to month, while our consuls abroad lost no time in bringing the appalling truths under their own eyes before their Government.

But politicians, who were feeling the foreign vote more and more important to their future elevation, continued under this moral torpor, in spite of facts, when the Hon. Hamilton Fish, of New York, in the House of Representatives, again succeeded, in the session of 1844 and '5, in presenting the subject to the deliberation of Congress, so far as to have the Committee on the Judiciary report whether any necessity existed for further legislation to prevent paupers and criminals from coming among us.

But this caused but a laugh at the stupid credulity of the American people, whose voice for years in this matter has been no more regarded by the National Legislature than the petty sovereign of that insignificant North American tribe, who walks out of his hovel to salute the sun and direct his daily course.

In addition to all the information imparted by our ministers, consuls and chargés abroad, proving the conceited action of Ireland and Germany in particular, to thrust their criminals and beggars among us, we find President Pierce, who feels himself another Xerxes, fettering American citizens with stripes as he did the sea; and issuing his commands as from another Mount Athos, to let foreign criminals and paupers alone, give them office, lands, ballot-box, and more than the American born will even claim, to secure but his success in the Nominating Convention for another Presidential term!

(The Great American Battle: or the Contest between Christianity and Political Romanism. Anna Ella Carroll. New York, 1856)

Anonymous said...

:-) There is nothing new under the sun. Same old story. The poor and the Catholic church are the main culprits for all the world's problems. Gee, if we got rid of the poor and the Catholic Church, then this would be paradise on earth!