I found this article illuminating:
Pope Francis has urged Roman Catholics not to ignore the plight of millions of migrants “driven from their land”, during Christmas Eve Mass.
The pontiff compared them to Mary and Joseph, recounting the Biblical story of how they travelled from Nazareth to Bethlehem but found no place to stay.
He has made defence of migrants around the world a major theme of his papacy.
If the Pope is shoehorning the story of Mary and Joseph – a couple who found themselves short of a bed for one night when travelling in their own country to attend a census – into a sermon praising open borders, then it’s a good sign he doesn’t take Christianity very seriously and has little interest in maintaining the Catholic church. This is especially the case since a good portion of the migrants he wishes to welcome are not Christians and likely view him, his words, and his organisation with utter contempt.
Pope Francis, the leader of roughly 1.2 billion Roman Catholics, is himself the grandson of Italian migrants. He said many of today’s refugees were fleeing from leaders who “see no problem in shedding innocent blood”.
If only the masses differed from their leaders, eh? Only every time the leadership changes, often replaced by someone drawn from the ranks of ordinary citizens, the result is much the same. It’s almost as if the culture, itself an aggregate of the people, is the problem, isn’t it? Which is why so many of these supposed refugees themselves “see no problem in shedding innocent blood”.
There are more than 22 million refugees worldwide. The latest cross-border influx involves the Rohingya fleeing violence in Myanmar.
Oh yes, we mustn’t forget the Rohingya. Whoever’s doing their PR is lavishing the BBC hacks with lunches somewhere.
The Pope visited Myanmar last month and later met members of the Muslim minority who had sought refuge in neighbouring Bangladesh.
So the Pope saw fit to pander to Muslims but remained utterly silent on the plight of Christians, such as Egypt’s Copts, in Muslim lands. Which religion is he representing, again?
The Pope stressed that faith demanded that foreigners be welcomed everywhere.
The Pope is implying this is some ancient religious tenet, whereas it’s nothing more than a shallow political viewpoint which only came into existence in my lifetime. Those walls around the Vatican and the Swiss guards protecting the entrances are there for a reason, and they’re a lot older than Pope Francis.
At Midnight Mass in Bethlehem, local Archbishop Pierbattista Pizzaballa condemned President Trump’s decision and said Jerusalem could not be a city of peace if people were excluded.
Moving an embassy excludes people, does it? One would have thought an Archbishop of Bethlehem would be clued-up enough on Jerusalem’s history to know which parties in the region have excluded people from it, but this is where we are.
Is it any wonder that Christianity has collapsed across Europe and other advanced nations when the heads of Christian organisations seem to have no confidence in their religion and sound like they’d rather belong to another?