There are some considerations which the US Bishops and
Mr. Huebscher (Wisconsin Catholic Conference) seem
to have missed in their essays and statements on caring for illegal immigrants. Since Huebscher is a Madison resident, it's not surprising that he chooses his citations very carefully. The USCC doesn't have that excuse, but their Central Apparatchik Office is located in D.C.. Maybe
that's their problem.
By all means, read the citations of Pope Leo XIII below. Perhaps our Bishops and their functionaries forgot about his
Rerum Novarum. But asking them to integrate HIS teaching with their......umnnhhhh.....rhetorical claim to the moral 'high ground' may have taxed their abilities. Or something. (HT:
BlackHat)
...
The USCCB document defines the illegal immigration problem exactly as
the Obama administration does—as a “humanitarian crisis” requiring US
government cooperation and funding, specifically for “child welfare
services, legal assistance, and access to immigration protection.”
Although it speaks of finding “root causes” in the countries of origin
and discusses what the countries themselves and “other regional
partners” can do to solve the underlying problems, the emphasis is on
the US role in these matters.
...
Perhaps the most revealing characteristic of the USCCB document is that
it speaks almost exclusively about the response of governments and the
Catholic Church to the “humanitarian crisis,” but says virtually nothing
about the response of American citizens, taxpayers, or even Catholic
parishioners. For example, it declares that “the institutional Catholic
Church in the United States has played a critical role in the care of
unaccompanied children.” That wording is highly misleading. In reality,
everything the “institutional Catholic Church” does is financed by
citizen’s taxes (awarded in the form of federal grants), by the
generosity of Catholic parishioners, or by both. The focus on institutional
efforts is therefore an insult to the millions of Americans who
actually fund the works of charity and mercy. It is also, in effect if
not intent, a subtle denial that legal US residents also possess
God-given dignity and rights....
Ah, yes, the matter of
taxpayer money....which will be dispensed to Dioceses and Catholic Social Services who care for these unfortunate children. Somehow, that was not mentioned by Mr. Huebscher. Hmmmm?
Now for Leo XIII:
[Socialists] hold that by . . .
transferring property from private individuals to the community, the
present mischievous state of things will be set to rights [sic],
inasmuch as each citizen will then get his fair share of whatever there
is to enjoy . . . [This transfer is] emphatically unjust, for
[it] would rob the lawful possessor, distort the functions of the State,
and create utter confusion in the community . . . Every man has by nature the right to possess property as his own.
The first and most fundamental principle,
therefore, if one would undertake to alleviate the condition of the
masses, must be the inviolability of private property.
[Although sharing one’s wealth and other temporal blessings is a requirement of Divine Law], it is a duty, not of justice (save in extreme cases), but of Christian charity—a duty not enforced by human law.
Among the many and grave duties of rulers
who would do their best for the people, the first and chief is to act
with strict justice . . . toward each and every class alike.
Neither justice nor the common good
allows any individual to seize upon that which belongs to another . . .
The State would therefore be unjust and cruel if under the name of taxation it were to deprive the private owner of more than is fair.
Yup.