Mexican-born Bishop Alberto Rojas of San Bernardino decreed on Tuesday that Catholics in his diocese can skip Mass so they can continue living as lawbreakers in a foreign nation.
Recognizing that fear of immigration enforcement, such as raids by the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), may deter some members of our diocese from fulfilling the obligation to attend Mass on Sundays and holy days of obligation (cf. Canon 1247), and acknowledging that such fear constitutes a grave inconvenience that may impede the spiritual good of the faithful...
"A grave inconvenience."
Rojas must have taken this from St. Paul's letter to the church in Rome, where he instructed them to "submit to the authorities ... unless it is a grave inconvenience to follow the law."
For Catholics, Mass is the epicenter of worship and Christian life. To give parishioners a cop out so they don't get caught by police for breaking the law is ... interesting, to say the least.
Here's more from the diocese:
It just kinda puts out immigrant brothers and sisters in a no-win situation.
There's a difference between lawful immigrants and trespassers. This distinction is being purposefully blurred.
Is the diocese saying that the solution to this "no-win situation" is to hide lawbreakers so they can continue exploiting a nation that is not their own?
Do I have that right?
"Ah," the leftwing defender will chime in, "But don't you understand that such things are necessary in Nazi Germany?"
Please point to where federal U.S. agents have violated God's moral law, or where U.S. border laws violate that law.
What you will see are respectful and professional police agencies enacting the policy of both Congress and the democratically elected president to enforce border laws that must exist in order for any nation's government to enact its first and foremost duty: Protecting its people and sovereignty from outside threats, abuse, and invasion.
The fact that a majority of Americans want ALL illegal aliens deported, meaning a majority wants no amnesty at all, should speak volumes as to how the American people feel about unrestricted and unenforced migration as a threat to themselves and their neighbors.
By comparing lawful and moral enforcement of border law to Nazi Germany in an effort to protect lawbreakers, leftwing activists (which includes the Diocese of San Bernardino, apparently) are favoring their "immigrant brothers and sisters" over their American brothers and sisters.
In this way, they show partiality. They care for one at the expense of the other by favoring a particular group of people even and especially when that group of people acts in criminal ways.
And yet St. James explicitly told the early church: "My brothers, within the glorious faith of our Lord Jesus Christ, do not choose to show favoritism toward persons."
James was speaking of favoring the rich over the poor, but liberals often favor the poor or the criminal over the rich or the law-abiding, and think themselves more godly for it. Their Marxist class distinctions run deep. And yet the instruction was to show no favoritism, for God does not show favoritism (Romans 2:11).
James goes on to say:
Indeed, if you fulfill the royal law prescribed in the Scripture, Love your neighbor as yourself, you are doing well. If, however, you show favoritism, you commit sin and are convicted by the law as transgressors. For whoever keeps the entire law, and yet stumbles at one point, is guilty of breaking it all.
You cannot love your American neighbor by preferring your lawbreaking Mexican neighbor. You cannot stumble in ignoring just and right laws meant to protect the borders of a nation and consider yourself to be faithful.
You may petition the government, you may provide assistance to migrants in need while their asylum claims are processed, and you may help lawful immigrants integrate into your community. You may also stand against the magistrate when he exceeds his jurisdiction and/or violates God's moral law (see: governments banning church services during Covid, or forcing a Christian baker to celebrate a gay wedding).
But you cannot lie about the situation by claiming the lawful deportation of trespassers back to their home nations is akin to ethnic cleansing. You also cannot twist Scripture out of context for your own means, like Amber.
What about Leviticus 24:22?
You are to have the same law for the resident alien and the native, because I am the LORD your God.
Our standard is to be the same. Would Bishop Alberto Rojas absolve his American brothers and sisters of attending Mass so they could escape tax fraud? Shoplifting? Breaking and entering? Why the double standard?
Again, partiality is on display:
The Bible says much about helping the foreigner and refugee. These were people who integrated into Israel, like Ruth: "Your people will be my people and your God my God." These people pledged to follow the law of Moses and the traditions of the Israelites.
God also commanded Israel to help those in need, particularly widows, the fatherless, and those suffering injustice at the hands of oppressors.
What God did not command Israel to do was to hide foreigners, in clear violation of national law, so that those foreigners could exploit cheap labor opportunities and import mass numbers of their own countrymen to replace the Israelites with micro-states that followed different languages, traditions, and gods.
In fact, God had quite a bit to say about Israel adopting the customs and religious practices of other nations.
While the purpose of God's commands to Israel do not overlap neatly with America (I'm not the one making this argument; the leftists are), we as Christians know that we are to submit to lawful governing authorities, that we are to love our neighbor, that we are to flee from sin, that we are to lead a quiet life supported by our own hard work, and that we are to proclaim the Gospel.
Feeding and clothing migrants, even illegal ones, can fit into that.
Using the church to help them evade lawful arrest for the crime of trespassing (and potentially worse) can not.
P.S. Now check out our latest video 👇
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Not the Bee or any of its affiliates.
