America's 'soul' at risk over immigration, Archbishop Gomez warns

[Tigg]

Tigg,

Christs teachings teach us to care for the needs of others before ourselves… Therefore, our focus should be directed to the benefit of Mexico before that of the US. We should be asking ourselves; What’s best for Mexico…

Gotcha!!

 

[Geist]

Then you show that Archbishop Gomez is right. Realize that by the manner we judge others (no sympathy), so also will will we be judged by God. I understand those that want to see the law enforced. I do not understand a calloused heart in a Christian.

“Calloused”? How so? Myself and my fmaily (a citizen) would face hardships for transgressing the law just as the illegal and his or her family does.

This is fairness and basic stuff for a civil authority to do.

Why are they to be exempt from the consequences of their actions according to you and the Archbishop?

What makes them so special they can flaunt apparently any law they want and be immune from the repercussions?

 

[TEPO]

We seek what is best for the people, of any country, or we should, in my opinion. We should also take care to consider our motives for care, so that it’s genuinely what’s in the best interest of His, and not really what’s in our own best interest. It comes down to our intentions, which only One can see and will judge accordingly.

Yes, but regarding the concept of “national souls”…? I think that’s what was originally being discussed.

…If we regard nations as having souls, then shouldn’t we be taking care of the needs of other nations as a whole?

 

[Geist]

townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavlich/2013/04/01/exclusive-illegal-border-crossings-double-as-beltway-gets-close-to-deal-on-immigration-reform-n1554148

Exclusive: Illegal Border Crossings Double, Border Becomes Less Secure as Beltway Gets Close to Deal on Immigration Reform

When you reward breaking the law, it only encourages more of it.

If they expended half as much energy on making Mexico a better place to live as they did sneaking into here I wonder what it would look like?

 

[Ridgerunner]

Tigg,

Christs teachings teach us to care for the needs of others before ourselves… Therefore, our focus should be directed to the benefit of Mexico before that of the US. We should be asking ourselves; What’s best for Mexico…

What nation on earth would this not apply to? Lots of countries are much worse off than Mexico; a country that isn’t really “third world” at all. Not a single country in Eastern Europe has average earnings as high as those in Mexico. Not one. And there are countries far worse off than that.

I recall reading that if every last asset in the U.S. was sold off (your house, my car, your 401K…everything, and assuming there were buyers) each person on earth would receive just short of $1,000.00. Of course, without a U.S. economy, that $1,000 would be worthless anyway.

It’s all well and good to say we in the U.S. should think of some other country before we think of our own. But as a practical matter, that’s not a practical matter.

 

[Geist]

What nation on earth would this not apply to? Lots of countries are much worse off than Mexico; a country that isn’t really “third world” at all. Not a single country in Eastern Europe has average earnings as high as those in Mexico. Not one. And there are countries far worse off than that.

I recall reading that if every last asset in the U.S. was sold off (your house, my car, your 401K…everything, and assuming there were buyers) each person on earth would receive just short of $1,000.00. Of course, without a U.S. economy, that $1,000 would be worthless anyway.

It’s all well and good to say we in the U.S. should think of some other country before we think of our own. But as a practical matter, that’s not a practical matter.

The white savior industrial complex never rests.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

As I see it, we have to do what we’re told when flying on an airplane. If the airbags are released, FIRST put the oxygen mask over your own face. AND THEN assist your child or whoever needs help. If our own country goes down the tubes for financial reasons, we can’t help ourselves or anyone else.
We have to get our own house in order first. And when it comes to how countries are run, you have to have order and laws that are obeyed. Otherwise there’s chaos and anarchy. We can’t take on the burden of caring for all these illegals while running up trillions of dollars of debt. We have to take care of that first.
That aside, the US has always been very charitable to other nations. And I’m sure we’ve given lots of money to Mexico. We can’t take care of so many of their citizens at once. Our laws are being broken by those who are overrunning our borders.

Are laws being broken when someone has an abortion? Laws are not always in line with the Gospel teachings. That’s why we are discussing ‘immigration reform,’ no matter what one’s personal view of the best solution is.

I believe our faith in Christ is that Christ is in charge, according to His will. Is our faith full if we say, ‘we have problems we must take care of first?’ The fullness of faith is to place all things in His hands, and according to His will. He can provide, if we have faith He can, as opposed to ‘we can,’ which is saying we have to take care of our problems first, in my personal view.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Yes, but regarding the concept of “national souls”…? I think that’s what was originally being discussed.

…If we regard nations as having souls, then shouldn’t we be taking care of the needs of other nations as a whole?

Our national ‘soul’ is our collective view, which forms our collective soul.

 

[ishii]

“Round up those fence jumpin’ law breakers and send 'em home. This is America - I don’t care if they break up families as long as the aliens get sent home.”

AND

“We need to remember that we live in a global village and a part of the human family. I just don’t understand someone who would be so callous as to suggest that we enforce our laws. Let all of God’s children come here and live among us and get welfare, foodstamps, free education, healthcare, abortions. And we’ll even register them to vote and guide them on who to vote for… this is Christian charity.”

Neither point of view makes sense - there needs to be compromise on this issue. We have millions of illegals (I mean, “undocumented”) who realistically can’t be rounded up and sent home. Seal up the border. Then give those here a path to citizenship that isn’t amnesty. I am skeptical that will happen because the Republicans don’t lead on this issue and the other party just wants more immigrants here so they can add to their constituency of welfare takers and win more elections so they can keep abortion legal.

Ishii

 

[RACJ]

Our national ‘soul’ is our collective view, which forms our collective soul.

Sorry, PS, but this concept of a “national soul” is in line with Obama’s distinctly unbiblical belief in “collective salvation”. If indeed there is such a thing, however, it is crystal clear after the last few elections that we are all doomed. Rob

 

[RACJ]

“Round up those fence jumpin’ law breakers and send 'em home. This is America - I don’t care if they break up families as long as the aliens get sent home.”

AND

“We need to remember that we live in a global village and a part of the human family. I just don’t understand someone who would be so callous as to suggest that we enforce our laws. Let all of God’s children come here and live among us and get welfare, foodstamps, free education, healthcare, abortions. And we’ll even register them to vote and guide them on who to vote for… this is Christian charity.”
Ishii

Ishii, these quotes may well be purloined for use in Luis Leon’s next “Easter” service during which Obama will (as usual) not be listenisng! :ehh:

 

[Elizabeth502]

It’s all well and good to say we in the U.S. should think of some other country before we think of our own. But as a practical matter, that’s not a practical matter.

It’s not just “impractical.” It would not accomplish what dewy-eyed dreamers imagine it would accomplish.

A multi-pronged approach to the desire for immigration (which have multiple reasons, poverty being of course one major reason) should be examined by our government (and by us, its citizen participants) in order to address the social justice requirements of the Gospel.

Thus, immigrants come here for the following reasons:
Economic survival (a more rare reason than many US citizens believe, but one of the reasons)
Economic improvement – i.e., from a status of basic comfort to a more comfortable level. That improved level ranges from slightly better in some cases – depending on the country and the person(s) to vastly better in other cases, given a “ceiling” in many countries, preventing the excesses of wealth which are possible in the US.
Religious persecution or discomfort
Cultural and political considerations – e.g., justice for women (opportunity, protection, legal defense, etc.)
Educational opportunity on any level, from lower to higher education

The combined above problems – especially those focusing on economics and politics – are not solvable simply by immigration reform, including the possibility of an open-border country. And keep in mind that I am limiting reasons for immigration only to “pure” reasons, which is a very naive/idealistic assumption, but let’s grant it for purposes of argument. The reason for the statement in bold is that it is objectively true that such combined and legitimate problems exceed the capacity of the U.S. to absorb and “solve” them through immigration alone.

In a fantasy, cartoon understanding of life (i.e., childish), this latter statement implies a country (the U.S.) with infinitely expandable borders and similarly expandable cash reserves (outgo), rather than a fixed land mass and the limitations of any country’s economy and resources.

Let’s step back for a moment from the assumptions of Latin American immigration (the usual Elephant in the Room), and refocus on China for a moment. This is a country which bears some similarities to Mexico, in terms of paradoxes within their economy and their resources, and a government which is considered as dysfunctional as Mexico’s. The dysfunctions within Chinese society (political, economic, educational, environmental) exert pressures on immigration into the U.S., which, comparatively speaking, escapes these same problems. In China, the notion of opportunity, in the American sense of that, is limited. The “quickest” solution is to emigrate, and the logical choice is the U.S., since we appear to be the most legally and illegally immigrant-friendly country on the globe.

In addition to many other problems China has, not enough has been done nor is being done to create avenues for new graduates of China’s universities, and the mathematical projections into the future are not attractive. If you think an uneducated person (for example, a rural Mexican) may not be content with that static lifestyle indefinitely, multiply that by a factor of 10 or 15 for someone who has been educated, and from a culture (Chinese) which assumes that education does equal career opportunity.

I realize that here I’m talking about mainly legal immigration, but the social justice dilemma still holds, given that both the process of legal immigration and the results of illegal immigration need reform: What do we do about citizens of other countries whose own country (Mexico, China, countries in the Middle East and Africa) either cannot or will not reform, prosper, and share with its citizens? To dream that they can all come here is to adopt a 5-year-old’s view of the world. Justice demands that the U.S. attempt vigorously and consistently to aid and to pressure, where possible, those countries to provide their own justice. This is not a cop-out on my part. It’s realism in the very service of idealism.

**IMMIGRATION TO THE U.S. WILL NOT SOLVE THE MOST PRESSING SOCIAL JUSTICE PROBLEMS IN EITHER THE SECOND OR THE THIRD WORLDS. ** If you think otherwise, you have chosen not to inform yourself of the social, economic, and political facts. Not theories, not ideals. Facts.

If immigration were a realistic solution, then I would have to agree with the advocates for uncontrolled migration. However, the size of populations of the Second and Third Worlds do not support such an approach to social injustice on the planet. It’s not even triage. It’s a bandaid approach to massive organ failure. It requires crack teams of economic and political surgeons to begin to address some of these problems of global social injustice. Pretending that supporting illegal immigration from the country closest to us will “solve” or even do much to ameliorate social justice is a convenient but false rationalization for a sincere Catholic conscience, in the context of the Church’s wider social doctrine. Anyone who is sincere and honest about social justice should spend more time learning about the global situation and joining thoughtful local and national discussions about this, including in conversation with U.S. government bodies, representatives, and agencies.

And I will submit that not to do so is inviting global social-political unrest. The Information Age has radically changed expectations outside of our borders, and will continue to do so. Residents of other nations will continue, increasingly, to expect First World opportunities of their own environments, regardless of the mismatch between their goals and their local circumstances. Since U.S. immigration cannot be “the” (singular) solution for the globe, options other than that must be explored.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Sorry, PS, but this concept of a “national soul” is in line with Obama’s distinctly unbiblical belief in “collective salvation”. If indeed there is such a thing, however, it is crystal clear after the last few elections that we are all doomed. Rob

Archbishop Gomez is the one who called on religious to be the ‘voice of conscience’ and also referred to ‘America’s soul.’ I have offered my view of what he is speaking about, but I have not seen anyone else attempt to explain it in other terms. Personally, I don’t see it being that difficult to understand. I haven’t seen anyone offer one of our bishops speaking in favor of mass deportations, to include separation of family members, as a solution to the immigration reform debate.

 

[TEPO]

What nation on earth would this not apply to? Lots of countries are much worse off than Mexico; a country that isn’t really “third world” at all. Not a single country in Eastern Europe has average earnings as high as those in Mexico. Not one. And there are countries far worse off than that.

I recall reading that if every last asset in the U.S. was sold off (your house, my car, your 401K…everything, and assuming there were buyers) each person on earth would receive just short of $1,000.00. Of course, without a U.S. economy, that $1,000 would be worthless anyway.

It’s all well and good to say we in the U.S. should think of some other country before we think of our own. But as a practical matter, that’s not a practical matter.

Exactly.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

It’s not just “impractical.” It would not accomplish what dewy-eyed dreamers imagine it would accomplish.

Was Christ a ‘dewy-eyed dreamer?’ Think about it. Motivations on this forum, and in this thread in particular, Christ’s Gospel is what compels those in favor of immigration reform, that would allow a pathway to citizenship for those here. If that view is dewy-eyed dreaming, He is the focus behind the hopes that we can become a world that cares for each other beyond borders, or nationalities.

As for global immigration, as far as I know, it exists in many other countries.

 

[Neildown]

My thought/proposition-from-the-top-of-my-head on the illegal immigration debate is that we should allow illegals to remain in America, provided they aren’t otherwise “criminals” (ie. murderers, gang members, rapists, child molesters, robbers, etc.). Said murderers, etc. should be deported, but others should be allowed to stay on the condition that they work toward an American citizenship whilst under loose surveillance. In this state they would pay a reasonable tax going to the funding towards becoming a citizen, and some extra going towards the local economy. Once becoming an American citizen, said person would then no longer have to pay that tax or be under surveillance, and only an economic benefit would result of the process.

Of course it’s completely idealized and I haven’t put a ton of thought into it - but I think it would be a legitimate consideration.

 

[Elizabeth502]

Was Christ a ‘dewy-eyed dreamer?’

No. He was much more realistic than many on this thread. He also lived, in human form, in a world – globally – with a radically different life-span for humans, as well as a human-labor-intensive reality, resulting in a demand for human labor and a completely different calculus for absorption of migrating populations. He spoke generally about welcoming the stranger. He did not speak into the future about unlimited welcomes for life-spans 2 and 3 times what they were in the ancient Mediterranean, and within industrialized societies. It’s anachronistic to apply his general mandate to welcome the stranger (none of which I oppose) to specific complexities in the 21st century. Welcoming the stranger, in the terms of Jesus’ vision of justice, must be combined with improving the internal conditions of the many countries and governments not supplying social justice to their residents. Anything else is a convenient cop-out and a distorted (limited) understanding of Christ-like justice.

He is the focus behind the hopes that we can become a world that cares for each other beyond borders, or nationalities.

Non-responsive to my post. My post specifically ***addressed *** and urged

a world that cares for each other beyond borders, or nationalities

And promotion and support for illegal immigration simply from Mexico is not a prescription for

a world that cares for each other beyond borders, or nationalities

As for global immigration, as far as I know, it exists in many other countries.

Please tell us which economically, politically, religiously, and socially desirable country has a policy of unlimited global immigration. Not repressive governments. Not countries with impoverished economies. But economically healthy countries where individual freedoms are supported and opportunity is abundant in similar measure to the U.S. It certainly wouldn’t be Canada, who found out – I believe in the 1980’s – that it was fast becoming the exclusive Land of Opportunity and Open Borders, and instituted some radical changes, immediately.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Christ’s Gospel is what compels those in favor of immigration reform, that would allow a pathway to citizenship for those here.

As for global immigration, as far as I know, it exists in many other countries.

Do you really believe that’s what motivates those in politics pushing for immigration “reform”??? Remember, approximately half of them also push abortion, including many of those who are Catholics.

No, it’s politics…self-aggrandizement, that motivates many. And among those who are not politicians, I doubt one person in 100,000 really knows, let alone has thought through, the various proposals the various politicians have espoused.

And if one simply wanted someone from another country to earn more here than he could in his home country, how does that say anything about that person’s citizenship? One does not need citizenship in order to work in this country. He only needs a work permit.

What countries allow open immigration that also allows one to work in that country? I would really like to see that list.

 

[Prodigal_Son1]

Immigration is a reality in countries all over the world. Islam is not spreading through conversions alone in England, France, etc. People pour over borders of war torn countries.

Economics, before immigration reform?

Mat 6:24 No man can serve two masters. For either he will hate the one, and love the other: or he will sustain the one, and despise the other. You cannot serve God and mammon.
Mat 6:25 Therefore I say to you, be not solicitous for your life, what you shall eat, nor for your body, what you shall put on. Is not the life more than the meat: and the body more than the raiment?
Mat 6:26 Behold the birds of the air, for they neither sow, nor do they reap, nor gather into barns: and your heavenly Father feedeth them. Are not you of much more value than they?
Mat 6:27 And which of you by taking thought, can add to his stature one cubit?
Mat 6:28 And for raiment why are you solicitous? Consider the lilies of the field, how they grow: they labour not, neither do they spin.
Mat 6:29 But I say to you, that not even Solomon in all his glory was arrayed as one of these.
Mat 6:30 And if the grass of the field, which is to day, and to morrow is cast into the oven, God doth so clothe: how much more you, O ye of little faith?
Mat 6:31 Be not solicitous therefore, saying: What shall we eat: or what shall we drink, or wherewith shall we be clothed?
Mat 6:32 For after all these things do the heathens seek. For your Father knoweth that you have need of all these things.
Mat 6:33 Seek ye therefore first the kingdom of God, and his justice, and all these things shall be added unto you.

Faith in Him, and what He taught, will those worldly things be added to us, according to His word. Is what He taught ‘impractical?’ I can’t see myself trying to explain our needs had to be met first Lord.

What we apply to ourselves individually, is also applied to what we support in our country. Collectively, ‘America’s soul,’ is all of us.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I can’t see myself trying to explain our needs had to be met first Lord.

Your post didn’t address any specific poster, but I’ll answer it nevertheless.

I can’t see myself trying to explain for one millisecond how I could reconcile a capable brain and education with my rationalization that illegal immigration for a minuscule few from one country is a formula for His social justice. He will ask me to account for my information base vs. my actions and my attempt to educate.

What we apply to ourselves individually, is also applied to what we support in our country. Collectively, ‘America’s soul,’ is all of us.

Indeed. Which is why it’s so crucial, in support of such a national soul, to examine more effective and more permanent solutions to the social justice mandate of the Gospels than merely a passive response to an accidental immigration policy, which is frankly what we mostly have now. I don’t see a single one of your posts addressing that fact and that reality.