Biblical perspective on DACA?

[Ender]

The Church has spoken on all of these issues.

In general terms only. Individual bishops have given us their opinions regarding specific proposals, but these can in no way be considered doctrinal, and we have no obligation to assent to their political views.

Minimum wage should be a fair amount, therefore I support raising the minimum wage to $10.10/hr.

You just said the church has spoken on this issue: so what does the church say the wage should be set to? Either she has set the wage or she hasn’t, and if she hasn’t then the question is prudential and every one of us is equally justified in suggesting any level (including zero) that he thinks is best.

Don’t you see the problem in suggesting the church has taken a position on this issue and then immediately demonstrating that she has not? You see yourself justified in setting the wage to $10.10/hr, but you are neither more nor less justified than those who think it should be $15/hr or $5/hr. All of those levels are morally equivalent.

Health care should be available to all, therefore I support the ACA and Medicaid/Medicare.

Good for you. You are deciding what you think is best - so on what basis do you deny that right to others?

Gun violence should be mitigated, therefore I support gun legislation.

You have your position, and I have mine, and there is no moral distinction between them.

Immigrants should be loved and treated as humans, therefore I support DACA.

I think we should do what is best too. Whether or not my proposals align with yours doesn’t change the fact that we are both doing what we think is right, and therefore our actions are equally moral.

Life should be protected at all times, therefore I oppose abortion, euthanasia, and capital punishment.

The church has condemned abortion and euthanasia, therefore any support of those actions is immoral. There is no choice here; opposing positions are not equally moral.

Marriage is a sacred covenant between one man and one woman, therefore I oppose gay marriage.

The church has explicitly condemned this. Opposing positions are not equally moral.

My political views are formed by Church teaching, not partisan political platforms.

As are mine. Your condemnation of my intentions is a rash, and uncharitable judgment.

 

[Ender]

Involving an evil is not the same as being that evil. Immigration “involves” an evil, one that you can end in weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth, according to Jesus. Abortion is intrinsically evil. Laws permitting abortion, however, I oppose because of Church teaching, not because I believe any specific law is intrinsically evil.

You are conflating natural evil with moral evil; that’s not helpful. Immigration involves natural evils, not moral ones.

 

[pnewton]

Immigration involves natural evils, not moral ones.

An opinion I do not share. Poverty is a natural evil. Ignoring the poor is a moral evil.

So which bishops are opposed to DACA?

 

[Ender]

This message was sent by Bishops DiNardo, Gomez, and Vasquez. There is nothing to indicate that it represents even the majority of US bishops, let alone the 2/3 required for it to be an official statement.

Nor should we overlook this:

“No episcopal conference, as such, has a teaching mission; its documents have no weight of their own save that of the consent given to them by the individual bishops.” (Cardinal Ratzinger)

 

[pnewton]

This message was sent by Bishops DiNardo, Gomez, and Vasquez. There is nothing to indicate that it represents even the majority of US bishops, let alone the 2/3 required for it to be an official statement.

Nor should we overlook this:

“No episcopal conference, as such, has a teaching mission; its documents have no weight of their own save that of the consent given to them by the individual bishops.” (Cardinal Ratzinger)

So which bishops have offered a contrary opinion? The names and positions on this letter are substantial and significant.

 

[whichwaytogo47]

An opinion I do not share. Poverty is a natural evil. Ignoring the poor is a moral evil.

So which bishops are opposed to DACA?

Poverty is not an evil. Ignoring poverty and/or ignoring being generous is. Capitalism has reduced the poverty to a level where if everyone was generous, we could almost wipe out poverty. It’s not the State that needs to stamp out poverty - people need to be able to set their own destiny and their dedication, not their government, needs to define their success.

I’m opposed to DACA. A person who comes here as a minor should not receive automatic protection. We need to have a set of procedures that instead dictate when an individual deserves asylum and when an individual should be sent back. I think asylum should be granted if someone is a legitimate refugee (not a poverty refugee) or when a person came here when they’re so young that they couldn’t re-assimilate to their home country.

It’s not compassionate to have open borders. It’s compassionate to them reform their own governments so that their lifestyle is better rather than having all the world coming here. Compassion is for the individual not the entire group. Moral relativism treats morality based on how many people are positively affected vs negatively affected whereas moral absolute treats all morality the same regardless of how many people are more / less affected.

 

[Ender]

An opinion I do not share. Poverty is a natural evil. Ignoring the poor is a moral evil.

And here it is again: the uncharitable judgment of others. “You disagree with me because you don’t care about the poor.”

We can’t go two posts without the implication being made that “You’re evil”. Nowhere do we discuss actual proposals. Everything in this thread reinforces my earlier objections: all of this moral condemnation has crowded out any rational discussion of the problem. No progress is possible if all the debate involves are judgments of others.

Now is it clear why I said the most relevant Scripture passage was “Judge not…”?

So which bishops are opposed to DACA?

Frankly, Scarlett, I don’t…look to the bishops for solutions to political issues.

 

[whichwaytogo47]

Frankly, Scarlett, I don’t…look to the bishops for solutions to political issues.

Not even the Pope do I look at for solutions to political issues. Clergy is to help bring people to salvation which is far more important than their political leanings. They’re less effective at bringing people to salvation if their teaching is clouded by their political leanings. People have virtue and their heart from all different perspectives.

 

[pnewton]

And here it is again: the uncharitable judgment of others. “You disagree with me because you don’t care about the poor.”

Surely you can read what I wrote better than that. I did not say a word about you. I said ignoring the poor is a moral evil because that is what Jesus taught, as well as Moses and the Prophets. Judging and action, or failure to act, is not judging anyone specifically, especially since I referenced no one.

Frankly, Scarlett, I don’t…

That I got, more’s the pity.

 

[pnewton]

Every law is a political issue, including those about abortion and gay marriage. The acts of abortion and gay marriage are not political issues, but the laws are. Ignoring what the Church in a nation is saying is why we have so many pro-abortion Catholics.

Clergy is to help bring people to salvation which is far more important than their political leanings. They’re less effective at bringing people to salvation if their teaching is clouded by their political leanings

Does this include making abortion illegal? Gay marriage?

 

[Ender]

Surely you can read what I wrote better than that. I did not say a word about you. I said ignoring the poor is a moral evil because that is what Jesus taught, as well as Moses and the Prophets. Judging and action, or failure to act, is not judging anyone specifically, especially since I referenced no one.

No, you did not explicitly say it, you simply implied it. That’s a distinction without a meaningful difference.

And here are yet more posts that have nothing to do with the problem of DACA. There could be no better contrast between the two sides on this issue than to compare comments like this one, which suggests personal moral failure, and post #66 by @whichwaytogo47 which presents actual arguments in support of the position he has taken.

Anyone who is comfortable he can defend his position should be able to articulate arguments to support it. Judging others is not a defense.

 

[Ender]

Every law is a political issue, including those about abortion and gay marriage.

This is true. What is not true is that every political issues is also a moral issue. Abortion is, immigration is not.

The acts of abortion and gay marriage are not political issues, but the laws are. Ignoring what the Church in a nation is saying is why we have so many pro-abortion Catholics.

I think the bishops have to accept responsibility for being ignored even when they shouldn’t be. They have made a habit of issuing political opinions, and people no longer distinguish their moral pronouncements from their political inclinations.

“By issuing policy statements on matters that lie beyond their specific competence, and that pertain rather to experts in secular disciplines, the bishops diminish their own credibility in speaking about matters with which they are specially charged as spiritual leaders of the church.” (Cardinal Dulles)

Your observation about pro-abortion Catholics only demonstrates the accuracy of Dulles’ warning.

 

[Usagi]

There is a moral dimension to many political issues, though. It’s true that the bishops don’t offer a set minimum wage for the country or the world — that part is not their area of expertise — but they are certainly within their rights and authority to reiterate Catholic social teaching on a just wage for the laborer. It is then up to states and citizens to apply that teaching to the specifics of their circumstances. There can be reasonable debate on that part among people of good will, but if someone’s policy proposal is causing unnecessary suffering, one may question the goodness as well as the wisdom of the proposal.

On DACA, similarly, the bishops’ thoughts on the details of that particular program (and the circumstances of its enaction and later wind-down) do not partake of their teaching authority, but they are certainly permitted to make an outcry on behalf of the individuals affected, and to address their treatment as a moral issue.

 

[pnewton]

No, you did not explicitly say it, you simply implied it. That’s a distinction without a meaningful difference.

I most definitely did not. And, for future information, that is exactly why there is a very meaningful difference between saying something and not saying that same thing and having someone assume you were implying that thing.

This sort of misunderstanding and inability to parse is why the laity need instruction lest they get tunnel-vision, filling in blanks with the wrong stuff and assuming, assuming, assuming.

 

[whichwaytogo47]

Every law is a political issue, including those about abortion and gay marriage. The acts of abortion and gay marriage are not political issues, but the laws are. Ignoring what the Church in a nation is saying is why we have so many pro-abortion Catholics.

Does this include making abortion illegal? Gay marriage?

The morality of gay marriage is the idea that you’re witnessing and not simply a spectator of an unnatural act. The assumption of marriage is not the idea that two consecrated virgins are getting together to share a life as a civil union (which would actually be acceptable) but something that requires the marriage to be consummated. It’s the same-sex sexual attraction that is sinful not the act of the agape love that they are attempting in the union. Typically agape love doesn’t involve two friends; it usually involves husband and a wife but in friendship or sibling relationships that are so close, there could be elements of agape love. Just because you have attraction to share sexually with people of the same sex and have sexual acts doesn’t mean you need to act on that. But the moral presumption is that because marriage is for the procreative act of one man and one woman that that term should be reserved only for heterosexual couples. A homosexual couple cannot fulfill the procreative act that is required for marriage and thus the Catholic Church cannot bless that marriage.

In terms of abortion, it’s clear cut. While the culture wants to say a women has a right to choose, she does not have the right to choose what to do with the infant that’s in her body as it’s not her body, but someone else’s that’s affected by that decision.

 

[angel12]

They are in the country illegally, so clearly they are in violation of the law, otherwise there would be no way to deport them. It could be argued that they ought to have a path to a green card, but granting citizenship is a reward for violating the law.

They are not the ones who violated the law. You think it’s a good thing to take someone who was brought here at, for example, age 5, and deport them to a country they don’t know, where they have no home, and may not even have a good knowledge of the language?

 

[Ender]

I most definitely did not. And, for future information, that is exactly why there is a very meaningful difference between saying something and not saying that same thing and having someone assume you were implying that thing.

What is the objective of stating the obvious viz “ignoring the poor is a moral evil” if not to suggest that this is an actual problem? Jesus said a lot of things, shall we just randomly quote him whether it is relevant to the issue or not? If it is relevant it is because it applies to the discussion…which would mean it applies to (some) of those here.

Did not Jesus also say “Well did Isaiah prophesy about you hypocrites.…” Now if I just left that citation without comment would you not assume I was applying it to you? In fact I simply searched for that comment to make a point.

This sort of misunderstanding and inability to parse is why the laity need instruction lest they get tunnel-vision, filling in blanks with the wrong stuff and assuming, assuming, assuming.

OK, then explain the reason for making the comment. Was it to imply something, or did you just assume (uh oh) most people were actually not aware that ignoring the poor is evil and needed to be informed?

 

[Ender]

They are not the ones who violated the law. You think it’s a good thing to take someone who was brought here at, for example, age 5, and deport them to a country they don’t know, where they have no home, and may not even have a good knowledge of the language?

I don’t mind being disputed but I prefer you take exception to what I’ve actually said. I did not say anyone should be deported. What I said was that I would not grant citizenship, although I might grant permanent legal alien status. I have not taken a position on anything else because I’m not that familiar with the details of the situation…and the devil is in the details.

 

[pnewton]

It was an example of a moral issue with political implications. I used that example, as that is part of Matthew 25.

“Then he will say to those on his left, ‘Depart from me, you who are cursed, into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels. 42 For I was hungry and you gave me nothing to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me nothing to drink, 43 I was a stranger and you did not invite me in, I needed clothes and you did not clothe me, I was sick and in prison and you did not look after me.’

44 “They also will answer, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry or thirsty or a stranger or needing clothes or sick or in prison, and did not help you?’

45 “He will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me.’

46 “Then they will go away to eternal punishment, but the righteous to eternal life.”

 

[Ender]

It was an example of a moral issue with political implications. I used that example, as that is part of Matthew.

Once the decision is made to help the poor (or, more relevantly, address the immigration issue) where is the moral concern? Am I immoral if I oppose DACA? That’s a yes or no question.