Hispanic bishops letter offers sympathy to illegal immigrants

[Elizabeth502]

You seem to be selective in what teach[ings] you wish to follow

 

[Elizabeth502]

I believe that the “extreme need” would only lessen the culpability, that is turn a grave sin into a lesser sin but it is still a sin none the less.

A moral evil is always a moral evil all that can change is the culpability of the one committing it.

So true.

There is no such thing in Catholic moral theology as deliberate immoral means to a supposedly moral end. Any Catholic who does not understand this, regardless of his or her position or function, does not comprehend (or does not accept) an integrated and whole Catholic morality. Ths bishops have never said that Catholics should promote, support, cooperate with illegal immigration “because of” a social justice end. Their documents state general social justice principles regarding the universal human need to migrate, within the law, for the purposes of survival, as opposed to a particular license to defy sovereign boundaries of a single country in pursuit of individual desires. And in general, those immigrating illegally to the U.S. from Latin America are not the poorest of the poor, who rarely have the means to travel and pay exorbitant amounts for “protection” for which the unpublished price is sexual exploitation.

Illegal immigration (the subject of this thread) is an activity fraught with inhumanity before, during, and after. Legal immigation, by contast, protects and supports the immigrant so that justice for the immigrant is not violated.

 

[pnewton]

Why is it whenever there is disagreement there are always accusations of ignorance to those who do not agree? Catholics in the United States speak of disagreement in matters like immigration, even against bishops, but seem so to bear little tolerance against those who disagree with them.

I quoted the Catechism. How much more Catholic can one get with that? While there is no such thing as an immoral means to a moral means, a staple of moral theology, that begs the question in the matter of immigration, namely, is an act an immoral means to begin with.

Whether the need of those who come here is extreme enough to diminish culpability, or to even eliminate it all together is truly a matter that is reserved for the judgement of God alone in each individual case. Even when it is a sinful ask, let those without sin starting picking up stones. I will not judge them as I have not been in their situation. If it drives anyone crazy that I will not pick up stones with them, but rather reserve sympathy and understanding, sin or no, oh well.

 

[Elizabeth502]

I have found that most people who object to legal status of immigrants either have some fears or bigotries.

And I, who have worked within this population possibly longer than you have (or at least as long), have not found that to be true whatsoever. You have an opinion, an opinion derived from narrow experience. If “most” of the people you happen to intersect with express “fear,” then your population base is limited. It is not my experience. In any case, you brought up not “people” in general, but posters on this thread and this forum. You have no evidence that posters who do not state so, are “afraid” or “irrational.” Further, forum rules prohibit telling other posters how they probably “think” or “feel.”

Their fears are often irrational. This is not so much sterotyping more than it it recongizing human nature.

Probably not as irrational as drawing conclusions about other people’s emotions and motivations, based on very little verifiable, objective evidence which has common reference points.

In your post I sense anger. Since you are not the only one reading my replys, I do respond to the wider reader.

The anger is toward anyone who would presume to look inside the hearts and minds of internet posters, plural, and assign to himself or herself the authority to discern the state of mind, intentions, morality, sincerity, and conscience formation of complete strangers. If you meant to exclude specific posters, then the responsibility lies with you to make such exclusions apparent. You generalized; I am one of the contributors about whom you generalized. Therefore, I am justifiably offended by your assumptions.

This issue is one as I said before that every Catholic needs to do an examination of conscience in light of Catholic Church Doctrine and the teachings of our bishops. Many of the post I have read are far from being in line with the Church.

Have you yet received theological instruction which includes the fact that you are responsible for, judge of, and master of, only your conscience, not those of others, nor are you in a position to decide whether others have well-formed or ill-formed consciences?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

LOL I just did, CCC-2408. It is says it is not theft to take someone’s goods without their consent in certain cirumstances. Only God know where there is mortal sin, venial sin or no sin. In any case, as I too sin, I tend to prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt and not judge these immigrants who break the law. I have not been in their shoes.

I do not see how this paragraph covers this issue. It speaks of an “immediate, essential need”, I fine it very hatd to justify illegal immigration as such a thing.

 

[Melvin]

LOL I just did, CCC-2408. It is says it is not theft to take someone’s goods without their consent in certain cirumstances. Only God know where there is mortal sin, venial sin or no sin. In any case, as I too sin, I tend to prefer to give people the benefit of the doubt and not judge these immigrants who break the law. I have not been in their shoes.

pnewton, I have to admit I did not know that…

Now, what would I like to have that I can’t afford?

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Why is it whenever there is disagreement there are always accusations of ignorance to those who do not agree? Catholics in the United States speak of disagreement in matters like immigration, even against bishops, but seem so to bear little tolerance against those who disagree with them.

I quoted the Catechism. How much more Catholic can one get with that? While there is no such thing as an immoral means to a moral means, a staple of moral theology, that begs the question in the matter of immigration, namely, is an act an immoral means to begin with.

Whether the need of those who come here is extreme enough to diminish culpability, or to even eliminate it all together is truly a matter that is reserved for the judgement of God alone in each individual case. Even when it is a sinful ask, let those without sin starting picking up stones. I will not judge them as I have not been in their situation. If it drives anyone crazy that I will not pick up stones with them, but rather reserve sympathy and understanding, sin or no, oh well.

Anyonecan quote documents . As I stated I believe you have streched this one to the point of breaking. I believe this is a case of proof texting.

I think parapgraph 2409 of the CCC has more to do with this issue than 2408.

 

[Melvin]

As someone who has actually done something to serve this country, I much prefer people who risk their lives and freedom to just get here [legally or illegally] then those whose only “service” in earning their citizenship was being born here. In my opinion, the first group has earned the right to be called American, the second group hasn’t.

Armyvet, thanks for your service to our country. But, if I might, let me point out that risk does not define either right or good. One can risk one’s life and freedom in unjust or immoral causes as well as just and moral…

Second, do I read correctly that those who are born in the United States, but may have done nothing that we might regard as “service,” do not deserve to be called Americans in your book? Really? I am sure that many who have not performed “service” work hard, support their families, vote (probably often for losing causes) and pay the oppresive taxes that fund everything from the massive welfare system (including its medical costs) to road work to the military-industrial complex…but, maybe they should just be stripped of their citizenship…

If that is what you meant, it is an astounding statement. But, it may, in a way, bring some light to bear on the larger issue. Perhaps the reason that many are so strident in their support for illegal immigration, ignoring the potential dangers to American society, is that they really don’t believe that American citizens have a right to their own country…

Now I get it!

 

[Tigg]

I do not see how this paragraph covers this issue. It speaks of an “immediate, essential need”, I fine it very hatd to justify illegal immigration as such a thing.

Thank you for saying this. There are those who would perpetuate this misconception and forget we are talking about millions flooding our borders. I doubt anyone who has seen the true conditions in Mexico would state this, where the poor, altho they live in poverty, are still working and feeding their families. The foreign aid given to Mexico is conveniently unmentioned as well.

 

[FAB]

Have you yet received theological instruction which includes the fact that you are responsible for, judge of, and master of, only your conscience, not those of others, nor are you in a position to decide whether others have well-formed or ill-formed consciences?

Since you want to question my credintials I am ordained clergy and yes I have had extensive theological instructions.
And yes people are called to have a well formed conscience based on prayer, knowledge and church teachings, and if after former that conscience and it is out of line with church teaching we are called to look at the issue again, because it is considered an ill-formed conscience.
The first reaction I noticed form severl posters on the bishops statement is that they objected to the statement, and said they should stick to saving souls. If these posters are Catholic, then they need to look at their conscience since there is something not properly or completly formed.

 

[Friar_David_O.Carm]

Thank you for saying this. There are those who would perpetuate this misconception and forget we are talking about millions flooding our borders. I doubt anyone who has seen the true conditions in Mexico would state this, where the poor, altho they live in poverty, are still working and feeding their families. The foreign aid given to Mexico is conveniently unmentioned as well.

That is why I think any part of immigration reform needs to also deal with the Mexician government. A lark part of the Mexian economy is money sent there from those working in the States. There working here is not as much of a benefit to our economy as it could be because of this.

The Mexican government has a disincentive to fix this as if they help out their poor too much they risk loosing this influx os US money.

What troubles me a bit is the out cry and condemnation against our government and hardly any comment against or any acknowledgment of the governments the perpetuate and benefit from the currnet system.

Mexico cries out about stricter enforcement of the laws on the books while giving out supplies to those who wish to cross the border illegally. It is only a misdemanor to be in the USA illegally yet Mexico treats it as a felony and is againt us making it si here or even ridgely enforcing the laws here.

 

[FAB]

That is why I think any part of immigration reform needs to also deal with the Mexician government. A lark part of the Mexian economy is money sent there from those working in the States. There working here is not as much of a benefit to our economy as it could be because of this.

The Mexican government has a disincentive to fix this as if they help out their poor too much they risk loosing this influx os US money.

What troubles me a bit is the out cry and condemnation against our government and hardly any comment against or any acknowledgment of the governments the perpetuate and benefit from the currnet system.

Mexico cries out about stricter enforcement of the laws on the books while giving out supplies to those who wish to cross the border illegally. It is only a misdemanor to be in the USA illegally yet Mexico treats it as a felony and is againt us making it si here or even ridgely enforcing the laws here.

No doubt that the Mexican Government shares in the problem, but they see it as ours. The largest import and source of money for Mexico is money being sent back from families in the US.

 

[pnewton]

I do not see how this paragraph covers this issue. It speaks of an “immediate, essential need”, I fine it very hatd to justify illegal immigration as such a thing.

It does not address the immigration issue, but rather when is direct theft not stealing, as in sin. What I was addressing was the question of whether a poor person is moral when committing actions that might otherwise be immoral if not poor. There is a precedent for this in the Catechism. We can not apply the rule to illegal immigrants (one can not commit an immoral act for a moral means) without assuming the act is immoral, which basically begs the question. Viewing these people as illegal is a point of law. Viewing them as* immoral* for being illegal is a point of judgement. It simply is not our place.

Perhaps what happend is that you applied my answer to the wrong question. I was narrowly looking at the inclination to say that these people are all immoral in their action. No doubt many are, but we should never in prejudice lump them together or assume the worst of anyone. Rather, as individuals we should offer them any consideration (individually, not as a government) that we offer Jesus.

 

[pnewton]

That is why I think any part of immigration reform needs to also deal with the Mexician government. A lark part of the Mexian economy is money sent there from those working in the States.

Absolutely it should, as should it also address the illegal immigrant’s need to contribute to our society that provides the services then may need. Likewise, I really think the bishops also need to balance sympathy for illegal immigrants and our duties toward the stranger with the responsibility of all immigrants toward their host country. Some bishops do this. It takes the edge off for those more “gung-ho” supporting or angry at illegal immigration.

FYI - I have told others here that my experience with this, like Elizabeth here, is rather extensive. I work both sides, having actively deported hundreds, helped with the deportation of thousands and yet attend a very immigrant heavy parish. I will always acknowledge the rather excellent points that she makes about the inequities that can be found where sympathy for illegal immigrants meets politics and we see unjustice and unfair treatment towards everyone else.