Principled dissent

Per one of my recent posts, Ad Orientem remarks on how the immigration narrative is drawing dissent from unexpected quarters. And today, I came across another one, from Catholic priest Fr. John Zuhlsdorf. Apparently, the Church's newly discovered 11th Commandment is highly remunerative:
Between Dec 2010 and Nov 2013, the Catholic Charities Diocese of Galveston received $15,549,078 in federal grants from Health & Human Services for “Unaccompanied Alien Children Project” with a program description of “Refugee and Entry Assistance.”

Last year, the Catholic Charities Diocese of Fort Worth received $350,000 from Department of Homeland Security for “citizenship and education training” with a program description of “citizenship and immigration services.”

Between September 2010 and September 2013, the Catholic Charities of Dallas received $823,658 from the Department of Homeland Security for “Citizenship Education Training” for “refugee and entrant assistance.”

From Dec 2012 to January 2014, Baptist Child & Family Services received $62,111,126 in federal grants from Health & Human Services for “Unaccompanied Alien Children Program.”
Note that plans for the current human wave have apparently been in the works since 2010. The comments are interesting, and the divide is deep and irreconcilable. I think a lot of enthusiasm for unchecked immigration correlates with childlessness or the ability to afford good school districts.

One commenter is pretty apocalyptic:
The Catholic Church will break in two over this. As to the Patriotic Catholic Church in America: Spare me Lord from sermons about unity from Dolan, O’Malley, or Gomez. Spare me the word “welcome” again from men in the pulpit with scales on their eyes. Spare me photos of Masses on the border with hands reaching through the security fence. Spare me pictures of Father Larry Snyder and Sister Carol Keehan praying with Obama in the Oval Office. Let those priests who would be missionaries, go to the foreign places and serve the poor as the Church has traditionally done. Spare us all of it before we lose our minds and our faith.

This got me thinking about the irony of the excommunicated Matthew Heimbach, an Anglo-Saxon perfectly content to worship in the Byzantine form in an archdiocese which answers to an Arab patriarch. Now, by contrast and without a lot of links I don't care to format, I have encountered folks who while simultaneously convinced that the West is a palimpsest, and morally obligated to welcome every r-selected group out there, are yet engaged in reconstructing a moribund Christian rite which is explicitly, ethnically Northern European. As I've noted, the natural impulse seems to be for Christians to want a liturgy in their own ethnic expression.

Thus, we see that where a lot of erstwhile liberal Westerners have encountered diversity, as in actual Russian, Greek or Arab Christian culture, and not just the harmless stuff at the ethnic food festival, they absolutely despise it. When it comes down to it, they prefer Muslim immigrants to Eastern Christian immigrants. By contrast, race realists such as Matthew Heimbach are perfectly open to learning from very different cultural forms and adopting them as their own. After all, what is supposedly his Western ethos is now just a cradle-to-grave harangue about his hereditary blame for all the ills of the planet, for which he must atone through his voluntary displacement and eventual extinction.

Why would I or anybody pledge their efforts to preserving a self-loathing, toxic ethos that wants to whitewash everybody into the same generic anti-culture? These people are deluding themselves; nobody outside their K-selected demographic cares about elaborate liturgics and arcane theology.

Western culture has now determined to wreck itself; those of us lacking the suicidal impulse are perforce jumping off the train.