Encouraged by their near-success in sinking health care reform, the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops has now set its sights on immigration. After Democrats announced an outline for legislation last week, the USCCB issued a press release. Responding to the Democrat's
proposal "which would allow LGBT citizens and legal permanent residents to sponsor their foreign national partners for residency in the United States," Salt Lake City Bishop John Wester, chairman of the bishops' Committee on Migration, wrote: "....we strongly oppose extending marriage-like immigration benefits to same-sex relationships. This proposal threatens to undermine the opportunity to bring together the Congress and the American people around a common solution to the important challenge of immigration reform."
OK, so we knew that the US Catholic bishops would find some reason to obstruct the Democrat's legislation on immigration as they did health care reform (however bogus), but few anticipated this additional statement from Wester: "We would support the inclusion of provisions which address 'push' factors that compel migrants to come to the United States, such as the lack of economic development in sending countries, so that migrants can remain in their countries and support their families in dignity."
As I pointed out in my previous diaries, Los Angeles Cardinal Roger Mahony and Miami Archbishop John Favalora have just been replaced before the usual retirement age of 75 with dependably-Republican Archbishop Jose Gomez and Bishop Thomas Wenski, respectively. Both cities are centers of Latin American commerce and finance. With no requirements that religions disclose their sources of funding or their spending on lobbying, Latin American moguls can pour money into the Church so the bishops can affect policy changes to their benefit. It would appear from Wester's statement there will be some trade-off for the bishops to drop their opposition to the bill in return for a provision favorable to their donors.
Some would argue that it would be foolish for Catholic bishops to lobby against legislation benefitting the demographic responsible for maintaining their numerical supremacy as the largest religion in the US. However, their cavalier response to a fourthof their native-born congregants drifting away, in addition to their opposition to this bill, validates the impression that their major sources of income are not the "people in the pew."