In the wake of President Trump’s Executive Order temporarily banning immigrants and refugees who cannot be properly vetted at the present time, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops( USCCB) released a statement expressing their solidarity with Muslims and voicing their deep concern over religious liberty issues. The statement – which is co-signed by Bishop Mitchell Rozanski (Chair, USCCB Committee on Ecumenical and Interreligious Affairs), Bishop William Lori (Chair, Ad Hoc Committee for Religious Liberty), and Bishop Oscar Cantú (Chair, Committee on International Justice and Peace) – expresses regret that the Executive Order should have generated fear and anxiety among refugees, immigrants and others, and says:
“...we join with other faith leaders to stand in solidarity again with those affected by this order, especially our Muslim sisters and brothers. We also express our firm resolution that the Order's stated preference for "religious minorities" should be applied to protect not only Christians where they are a minority, but all religious minorities who suffer persecution, which includes Yazidis, Shia Muslims in majority Sunni areas, and vice versa.
While we also recognize that the United States government has a duty to protect the security of its people, we must nevertheless employ means that respect both religious liberty for all, and the urgency of protecting the lives of those who desperately flee violence and persecution. It is our conviction as followers of the Lord Jesus that welcoming the stranger and protecting the vulnerable lie at the core of the Christian life. And so, to our Muslim brothers and sisters and all people of faith, we stand with you and welcome you.”
Once again, the USCCB has gotten it wrong by overstating the politics of the Executive Order rather than addressing its moral justification.
The Bishops, collectively represented by the USCCB, seem to be unaware of the teaching of the Church regarding the explicit duty of the state to protect its citizenry.
That teaching is specifically stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church which speaks teaches the responsibility of government to protect its citizens, even while welcoming the stranger.
According to the Catechism of the Catholic Church: "The more prosperous nations are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and the means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin. Public authorities should see to it that the natural right is respected that places a guest under the protection of those who receive him." (Paragraph 2241)
So a nation is not required to accept an unlimited number of immigrants, which would impose a burden on its own citizens – but we should be generous in accepting immigrants to the extent that we are able. And the decision regarding how many immigrants a nation can support should fall belongs to duly elected public authorities, not the Bishops.
The Catechism continues: "
Political authorities, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions, especially with regard to the immigrants’ duties toward their country of adoption."
Clearly, then, it is not wrong, according to the Catechism, for a President or the Congress to impose restrictions in order to ensure the safety and well-being of the American people.
Finally, the Catechism teaches that immigrants are only to be welcomed if they are willing to obey our laws. Immigrants are obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that receives them, to obey its laws and to assist in carrying civic burdens.
The Bishops simply cannot justify their statement in reaction to the President’s Executive Order. The very Catechsism of the Catholic Church refutes any of their arguments.
The Bishops need to realize that, in matters of Faith and Morals, they have become increasingly irrelevant voices to the Catholic Faithful. Why do they suppose that their meddling in politics will have any particular effect or import?
No comments:
Post a Comment