Cardinal McCarrick, senators back ‘DREAM Act Sabbath’
July 14, 2011
Senator Dick Durbin of Illinois has announced the DREAM Act Sabbath, an “initiative enlisting churches, synagogues, and mosques around the country to dedicate time during their regular weekly worship service to a conversation” about the Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors (DREAM) Act. The initiative will take place September 23-25.
The senator was joined by Senator Michael Bennet of Colorado and a dozen religious leaders, including three Catholics: Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, archbishop emeritus of Washington; Father Jacek Orzechowski, a Franciscan friar; and Sister Simone Campbell, executive director of NETWORK.
“These young persons, who are for all practical purposes Americans like all of us, love this country so much that they risk deportation in order to advocate to become American citizens,” said Cardinal McCarrick, referring to the children of illegal immigrants who would benefit from the act’s passage. “Why would we not want to embrace their dedication, energy, talents, and courage--characteristics that have made our nation great? It would be to our detriment to forsake them.”
- Durbin, Bennet, Religious Leaders Announce DREAM Act Sabbath (Senator Durbin)
- DREAM Act supporters plan push in September (CNS)
All comments are moderated. To lighten our editing burden, only current donors are allowed to Sound Off. If you are a donor, log in to see the comment form; otherwise please support our work, and Sound Off!
Posted by: impossible -
Jul. 18, 2011 11:03 PM ET USA
Sen. Durbin is the typical liberal hypocrite. He is pro-abortion, and abortion is a prime example of the children in the womb being punished for the sins of their parents.
Posted by: mgreen32234 -
Jul. 15, 2011 11:17 AM ET USA
Durbin? McCarrick? How about "Get Progressives Out of the Church Completely" Week? Let's have that "conversation."
Posted by: filioque -
Jul. 14, 2011 10:32 PM ET USA
Sen. Durbin appeals to a "moral principle ... – it is wrong to punish children for the actions of their parents." How about the moral principle that the legitimate laws of a nation must be obeyed? He says we all stand on the shoulders of immigrants. Yes, immigrants who waited their turn and came here legally. We need to reform our laws so that immigrants who are needed for work can come here legally and provide a fair resolution for those who are here, not just pretending nothing happened.
Posted by: williiam ronner -
Jul. 14, 2011 9:29 PM ET USA
Please retire McCarrick!
Posted by: kmbold -
Jul. 14, 2011 7:34 PM ET USA
P.S.: How is McCarrick going to handle the "conversation" aspect at Mass? Will that be before Mass, after the gospel reading, at the prayers of petition, or during the "kiss of peace"? This could result in pandemonium. Or is it to be a one-way conversation from one of the dedicated, energetic, talented, and courageous dreamers?
Posted by: kmbold -
Jul. 14, 2011 7:26 PM ET USA
Ah, it's suddenly acceptable for churches to get political? I'll be waiting to hear when the contrarian"s "Wake Up Act Sabbath" gets some time to promote abiding by the laws of immigration.
Posted by: Chestertonian -
Jul. 14, 2011 6:25 PM ET USA
Why would we not want to embrace them? Because, your emminence, they are breaking the law, trying to cheat all those "young persons" who have come to the US leagally, and waited their turn for citizenship, instead of trying to cut in at the head of the line. Our immigration laws are not rules 'made to be broken', and if the cardinal loves his country, too, he should support and defend her laws, as an examplar. Sentiments and emotions rarely make for good laws.
Posted by: stpetric -
Jul. 14, 2011 6:20 PM ET USA
I'm trying to hard to "think with the mind" of the bishops on illegal immigration, but I'm just not getting it. There's nothing immoral or unethical about a country controlling its borders, so I don't understand the imperative of rewarding lawbreakers. (And creating loopholes for illegal immigrants who entered the country as children directly rewards the children, even though they may not be personally culpable; and it definitely indirectly rewards their parents.)