The chairman of the US bishops’ Committee on Migration announced his strong opposition to President Donald Trump’s executive order on refugees.
What is their position on the priority given to the persecuted Christians?
This is a 3 month ban until they find out a better way to screen people coming into the Country. What is so evil about this? They have to put something in place that probably takes time, its not a ban that lasts forever? Seems reasonable to me.
Yet, I have already heard priests and Cardinal Cupich knock Trump and its only been day 2. It shows you how liberal the country is and how close this country is to falling about due to liberalism and how dangerous liberalism really is.
The media (besides Fox and EWTN) has been constantly ripping Trump on every single thing he does. They are the ones and those that go along with them that are causing disruption in the Country. If every thing you hear about someone is negative, you start to believe it even though you dont have all the facts.
From what I understand Immigration policies can be debated especially when its for security reasons. Where was Cardinal Cupich and all these liberal priests the day Same Sex Marriage (which is intrinsically evil) was the law of the land? Not a peep from the pulpit or from many Cardinals, not one word, and still not a word to this day.
Against it from what I read. It goes against religious liberty.
Agreed! May God bless you all!
I bet that’s not how the Bishops in the Middle East feel.
I think they’ve jumped the shark. I mean maybe I should halve my donations to the Church with a local mosque? Or maybe I should stop helping my older parents in favor of someone else’s. The statement in some parts sounds more like boilerplate non discrimination language the government requires. Of course it could because most funding comes not from charitable donations but federal grants.
Are you sure they’d disagree with this?
“The United States has long provided leadership in resettling refugees. We believe in assisting all those who are vulnerable and fleeing persecution, regardless of their religion. This includes Christians, as well as Yazidis and Shia Muslims from Syria, Rohingyas from Burma, and other religious minorities. However, we need to protect all our brothers and sisters of all faiths, including Muslims, who have lost family, home, and country. They are children of God and are entitled to be treated with human dignity. We believe that by helping to resettle the most vulnerable, we are living out our Christian faith as Jesus has challenged us to do.”
He never said the Bishops would disagree with that statement. He just said the Bishops in that area will be relieved that Christians are protected as well and given some priority.
He said the feelings of the Bishops in the Middle East are different than the feelings of the American Bishops. I posted the feelings of the American Bishops. How do the Middle Eastern Bishops feel about Trumps immigration policies?
Funny thing happened when I tried to find a statement from the Middle Eastern Bishops. I found this instead.
Almost the same number of Christian (37,521) as Muslim refugees were admitted in fiscal 2016, which ended Sept. 30. A slightly lower share of 2016’s refugees were Christian (44%) than Muslim, the first time that has happened since fiscal 2006, when a large number of Somali refugees entered the U.S.
First of all, it’s AN American bishop, not THE American Bishops who issued the letter.
Secondly, citing the percentage this way is misleading. Few of the Christians admitted as refugees come from the Middle East. They come from Africa, mostly Congo, where they are persecuted by Muslims. From the article cited:
“The (Obama) administration set the goal of resettling 10,000 Syrian refugees in the U.S. in the fiscal year. This goal was exceeded, and refugee status was given to 12,587 Syrians. Nearly all of them (99%) were Muslim and less than 1% were Christian. As a point of comparison, Pew Research Center estimated Syria’s religious composition to be 93% Muslim and 5% Christian in 2010.”
Is there a U.S. policy that prioritizes Muslim refugees and prevents Christian refugees? I don’t believe that there is anything in U.S. policy that says to puts roadblocks in front of Christians that aren’t in place for Muslims.
Here is a fact check on it: No evidence for Trump claim that it was ‘impossible’ for Syrian Christians to enter U.S.
Any shepherd worth their salt would be relieved to see some attention being given to the plight of their sheep. I’m struck by the OT passage that decries bad shepherds. Now, I certainly don’t think they want others excluded from help, but the only sentiments I’ve heard from the Christians there is a sense of abandonment from the West. I haven’t heard one to the contrary.
I also recall reading about some Christians hoping for Trump’s election, as they had some network and word he might try to do more about them. It was a pre-election NCRegister article. Don’t have time to find it.
So Bishop Joe Vásquez is not worth his salt as a shepherd?
While MSM Goes Nuts Saudi King Backs President Trump Refugee Plan
As far back as November 2015 then-candidate Donald Trump spoke about creating “safe zones” for refugees of the Syrian civil war.
At his post-election Thank You rally in Pennsylvania the President-elect told attendees, “When I look at what’s going on in Syria, it’s so sad,” adding, “we’re going to help people.”
Then-President-elect Trump said he wanted to build “safe zones” for civilians "so they can have a chance.
Knowing that the creation of such safe zones will require both an enormous financial commitment but also military personnel, Trump called for the oil-rich Sunni Gulf states (presumably including Saudi Arabia, United Arab Emirates, and Qatar), which have been supporting rebel forces, to band their resources together for this humanitarian project.
While the establishment media has been going nuts over President Trump’s temporary ban on immigration from terrorist hotspots, the King of Saudi Arabia has quietly endorsed “safe zones” as one step in the President’s plan to solve the Middle east refugee problem.
Naturally, the establishment media won’t report it, but this is what winning looks like – the King of Saudi Arabia agreeing to help keep “refugees” where they belong, near their homes in the Middle East.
The article starts “This is what winning looks like folks” and then goes on to not address the travel ban, which is what we’re discussing.
I added more to my post. It’s also against forum rules to say anything negative about any clergy. I don’t know the man, or anything about him. But, judging from the reactions of Bishops heavily involved with the Mexican community and immigration, they have the same reactions about the plight of their own people. As shepherds, they don’t want their flock to be forgotten, or marginalized.
Yes it did. It noted how the establishment media, aka MSM, are going nuts over the ban just like you!