A Reader Questions Use Of "Treason" For Religious Leaders` Pro-Immigration Stance; Peter Brimelow Replies
April 15, 2008, 05:00 AM
A+
|
a-
Print Friendly and PDF

NOTE: PLEASE say if you DON`T want your name and/or email address published when sending VDARE email.

04/14/08 - The Sacramento Bee Suppresses A Reader`s Comment On Immigration And Race On Public Education

From: Name Withheld (e-mail him)

Re: Joe Guzzardi`s Column: Easter Question: Which Church Is The Top Treason Lobbyist

Regarding Guzzardi`s column about the Roman Catholic, Lutheran and Methodist attitudes toward illegal immigration, I agree with his basic facts.

I strongly object, however, to the word "treason" in his article`s title as it applies to religious leaders.

Stupid—yes; misguided—yes. But "treason" implies knowingly and deliberately engaging with evil intent. Christ never promised us perfect clergy, only that the gates of hell would not prevail.

Remember when Napoleon told Cardinal Consalvi that he would destroy the Catholic Church? Consalvi asked in response how Napoleon could succeed when the clergy itself had already failed.

Look at the record of the Anglican Church for the past 500+ years. There remains an amazing pocket of great faith practicing within a body of bureaucratic Erastians.

Peter Brimelow replies: I usually explain that we merely use "treason" to describe immigration enthusiasm in the same warm, joshing sense that immigration enthusiasts use "racist", "xenophobe "nativist", etc. to describe patriotic immigration reformers. But since our reader asks, yes, I do think that some religious leaders have evil intent.