Well, that isn’t exactly what he said. And it wasn’t exactly the present pope (Benedict) who said it. It was Pope John Paul, in 1996, on World Migration Day. But, Ratzinger was very close to John Paul, and is known as the architect of Pope John Paul’s policies. “Elected” in the case of Ratzinger was more like a natural succession. So, we can be assured that Pope Benedict (Ratzinger) does not differ from the positions he engineered for John Paul.
I bambini circondano Papa Giovanni Paolo II durante un pubblico generale all’atrio
di VI di Paul schell di Papa nel Vaticano. AP, February 27, 2002.
Speaking of charitable institutions (i.e., churches) and their attempts to effect positive change in the immigration predicaments, Pope John Paul said,
“When no solution is foreseen, these same institutions should direct those they are helping, perhaps also providing them with material assistance, either to seek acceptance in other countries, or to return to their own country.” Vatican Document: Undocumented Migrants, point No. 4.
Of course, all such statements must be read in context. The Church has always been in favor of helping the needy, no matter who they are, where they are, or where they are from, or why they are needy. The above statement is not to be taken to mean that the Church is averse to immigration. (Indeed, in other statements, Pope John Paul declared it the responsibility of the Christians to care for the needy, regardless. See, Address to Congress/Pastoral Care of Immigrants, 1998, esp. point 5.)
However, the statement does lend itself to the discussion of the Church’s role in the present situation in America, and the Mexican invasion. The American Church, particularly the Archbishops of the Roman faith, such as Cardinal McCarrick of Washington, DC and Roger Mahoney of Michigan, is widely accused at this point of encouraging illegal Mexican invaders, because the invaders are Catholic, and because they are expected to contribute to the Catholic treasuries. But worse, the accusations against the Church are due to public statements by the radical bishops.
According to MichNews.com, Mahoney is guilty of “sedition” against the United States, because he has publicly instructed the priests of his diocese to ignore and defy any legislation against immigrants. Dr. Daneen G. Peterson says Mahoney is also in defiance of the Pope.
This is a crisis of authority. Father Mahoney claims his authority is the Holy Scriptures. In this, in defying the Pope in favor of the Bible, Mahoney behaves like a Protestant. Yet, in defying the United States government, he behaves like a traitor. It is a most curious predicament — all for the sake of criminal invaders.
Church leaders, Catholic or otherwise, must be prepared to face the consequences of their positions. They are not above treason, sedition, or criminal behavior. They are subject to law and imprisonment. They should also remember that they are responsible for their pejorative effects on the First Amendment as well — specifically that which allows the church a tax-exempt status. American bishops have no place defying the laws of America. (Ah, but they’ve always been a bit more “American” about their Catholicism. They’ll have it their way, like most Americans, when it comes to difference of opinion. Shall we call them the Protestant sector of Rome?)
Mexico is 89% Catholic, therefore, let the wealthy mobsters in Ciudad de Mexico take care of their own. Let the American archbishops rebuke their “federal” brethren south of the border.