The fact that both Congress and the Catholic bishops are addressing the immigration issue is igniting a serious discussion with significant moral ramifications for all Christians.
The Catechism of the Catholic Church and a number of 20th century papal encyclicals remind us that as members of both the city of God and the secular city we are obliged to welcome foreigners, to the extent possible. In fact, immigration is defined by the Church in the Catechism as a natural right (n. 2241). Nevertheless the Church does not forbid us from regulating immigration.
It is precisely at this nexus that the Church in the United States finds itself at this point in time. The moral question is, how do members of the Body of Christ welcome immigrants and regulate immigration in a way that is both legal and moral? How do disciples of Christ treat with love, dignity and justice our sister and brother immigrants?
Some of the statements in the letters to the editors in both the secular and Catholic press about the immigration issue have caused me some concern as a moral theologian. Some of the comments in those letters have led me to believe that a review of some foundational aspects of Catholic social morality might be in order to help Catholics frame a just and loving response to the immigration issue. In fact, some of the letters made it clear that the adage that "the Church's social teaching is indeed its best kept secret" is, unfortunately, more true than not.
My goal here is certainly not to propose any legal solution to immigration reform. What I do propose is that for Catholics, there are theological foundations that are essential if we are going to approach immigration reform from our Catholic perspective. It is my hope that even this very brief review of these foundations may help some Catholics reorient their starting point in this debate.
I would suggest that there are at least three theological foundations that provide clear support to the Church's concerns about immigration reform.
1. Every human being is created in the image of God and is both unique and equal. Some letters to editors refer to undocumented immigrants as "illegals." I find this appalling language. Apart from the fact that it is bad grammar, it is a type of objectification of others reminiscent of the worst kind of racial profiling. No human being is ever to be reduced to being totally or even primarily identified by the color of their skin, their country of origin, their legal status or any other external characteristic. Every human being is first and foremost a person. In the book of Genesis, Scripture reveals that every human being is created as "imago Dei," i.e. the image of God. Every human person is the child of God and therefore every human is a part of the family of God. We are sisters and brothers.
This is a foundational understanding of Catholic anthropology. This basic understanding of who we are has profound implications for our moral obligations to ourselves and one another. While it is clear that the greatest commandment is to love God, 1 John 4:20 reminds us that "if we say we love God but do not love our sister or brother, we are liars."
2. Only the common good is the guarantee of the individual good (Gaudium et Spes, 32). A Catholic political conscience always asks, "What is best for my brothers and sisters?" prior to asking, "What is best for me?" Catholic morality has a deep-seated foundation in the "common good." In other words only when society is essentially concerned with the common good, the good of all its members can it truly guarantee the good of every individual.
St. Thomas Aquinas' definition of law has the common good at its very center: "an ordinance of reason for the common good…." For the Catholic there can only be one response to Cain's question in the book of Genesis: "Am I my brother's (and sister's) keeper?" Yes, absolutely, we are our sisters' and brothers' keeper. Christian love, as preeminently exemplified in the cross, is a commitment to live and die for others not for the self.
3. It would be immoral to knowingly and willingly enforce and follow immoral laws (Catechism, n. 2242). Some letter writers mentioned that they were astounded that some of our bishops might encourage us to dismiss laws that trample on the human rights of immigrants. Indeed, this can seem a startling statement when we live in a country that is known for being a place of justice, a place of law and order. The argument expounded in some of the letters was basically that when there is a U.S. law it is one's moral obligation to follow it. While this holds generally, it is not a universal norm.
The Church has constantly taught that God-given human rights trump laws that trample on those rights. The apartheid laws of South Africa were legal but immoral, as were all the Jim Crow laws that abounded in the U.S. that protected legal forms of discrimination. Abortion is legal but it certainly is not moral. Pornography is legally produced and sold and watched, but it can't be defended as a moral enterprise. No Catholic could try to defend participation in an abortion or producing pornography based on the fact that they were "legal" activities.
At the Nuremberg trials, captured Nazis were convicted of crimes against humanity even through they had not broken any German laws. They were convicted because they had broken the natural law. Natural laws are universal laws which acknowledge and protect inalienable human rights, always and everywhere.
Every Christian has a prima facie moral obligation to live by Gospel standards even when those standards clash with established law. Isn't this what Rosa Parks, Maximilian Kolbe, Nelson Mandela, Dietrich Bonhoeffer and Oscar Romero, among countless others, have taught us? There is no doubt that Christianity at times demands that for us to be right and good means that we must challenge the political majority.
These three foundations are not meant to be either comprehensive or offer a simple solution to the very real and complex political challenges that are inherent in all attempts at the reform of immigration laws. Neither are they meant to suggest that immigration regulation is intrinsically immoral.
However, they are an attempt to offer some traditional Catholic moral foundations that might help us decide what moral vision to bring to discussions about immigration reform. Secondly, they remind us of the vision that Christian discipleship contributes to the discussion about immigration that is happening in the public square.
It might be good to remember that when each of us finally gets in line at the gate to heaven and St. Peter is checking our credentials for entrance, we can be sure that there is at least one thing he will not ask anyone for: a green card.
Vincentian Father Richard Benson is academic dean and professor of moral theology at St. John's Seminary, Camarillo. His column appears monthly in The Tidings.
|