New York City, N.Y., Jun 30, 2017 / 03:02 am (CNA).- With Catholic proposals to literally head for the hills in response to Christianity’s ever-lessening influence in secular culture, the leader of a global ecclesial movement has a provocative statement:
This is actually a great time for the Church.
“As a matter of fact,” says Father Julian Carron, “it is a precious occasion to verify the validity of the Christian proposal.”
Already garnering some notable attention since its release, a new book by Fr. Carron called “Disarming Beauty” takes on the question of the Church’s relevance amid modern society’s most pressing challenges. From terrorism to consumerism, “rights” culture to marriage and family, the book examines the plight of our current world and invites Christians to respond – not from a place of fear, but from the joy of their original encounter with the living person of Christ.
“The fact that the Church is no longer a moral majority is liberating; it allows us to rediscover the heart of the Christian event,” he told CNA. “The Church will survive and thrive only through Her witness.”
Fr. Carron heads Communion and Liberation, which originated in the 1950s with Italian priest Msgr. Luigi Giussani. The international movement focuses on the actualization of man’s faith by living the Christian presence within community.
Please read below for our full interview with Fr. Carron:
Why ‘Disarming Beauty’? What does the title mean to you?
The book speaks of the beauty of Christian faith, of its power and its attraction. When God takes on flesh, He strips Himself of His own power, entering into the history and poverty of the human condition, revealing to everyone the truth of His power. This is how Christianity, the greatest revolution of all time, began. Christ is the exemplar of a way of communicating truth that needs no other means beyond the beauty of truth itself. The book speaks primarily of this beauty, which is not just an aesthetic or sentimental one. Like all beautiful things, Christianity needs no other defense, other then its own beauty, to be communicated. With the expression “disarming beauty” I wanted to say: “We Christians, do we believe in the fascination that the disarming beauty of the faith can exercise?” With the phrase “disarming beauty,” I propose a Christian presence that would be sufficiently attractive so as to make life more interesting for everyone.
What exactly does beauty “disarm” us of? How does it do that?
Beauty disarms us from our narrow way of looking at ourselves and at reality; it opens our minds and our eyes to the totality of reality, of the real. The attractiveness of beauty moves us affectively, so much so that it allows reason to become truly opened to all the factors of reality. We discover this openness in Christ’s gaze on reality; we are surprised by the way Jesus looks at the publicans, at Zacchaeus or Matthew, or at the crowd. How is his gaze different from the one of the Pharisees, which reduces the person to his ability or his ethical performance? Jesus’ gaze at Zacchaeus helps him discover himself, awakening his self-awareness, something none of the Pharisees’ reproaches could do. We can say the same about the Samaritan woman, or the tenth leper. We understand the shock that His presence provoked: “We never saw anything like this.”
What do you perceive as the single greatest threat in modern society?
I think it is feeling adrift, destabilized, alone, and uncertain. Most propose to fight these emotions with walls, or changes in the system at the institutional level (as depicted by T.S. Eliot). Men and women today wait for, perhaps unconsciously, the experience of an encounter with people for whom life is “solid” in the midst of change. What will wake people up today is a human impact, an event that echoes the initial event that occurred when Jesus raised His eyes and said, “Zacchaeus, hurry down. I want to stay at your house today.” I believe that the present era is a great opportunity to witness to the disarming beauty of Christianity, and to verify the fascination of the Christian event, which does not require a context to protect it.
Why is education so important? Why do you say it’s the greatest challenge the Church faces?
We see so many students and teachers passive, skeptical, and even bored. Since we don’t know what to do, we manage the symptoms. Yet, we must face the challenge. The challenge for the educator is to reawaken desire, to experience the restlessness which St. Augustine speaks about. To do so, we must introduce students to a relationship with reality in its totality, with all of its beauty and meaning.
For this reason, it is necessary to put the person at the center, to teach students to look at the world with their own eyes, to think with their own heads, thus developing a critical spirit that makes their “I” more of a protagonist and less a spectator, more a leader and less a follower, more a citizen and less a subject.
This dynamic is only possible when a teacher is a witness to this relationship with reality, not as one who imposes herself or her way of seeing things upon others, in an authoritarian way, but someone who challenges the other by her own way of living.
What changes must the Church make not only to survive, but thrive in today’s modern culture?
Christians are faced with an unprecedented challenge. Yet, we are not afraid of wide-ranging dialogue, without any privileges. As a matter of fact, it is a precious occasion to verify the validity of the Christian proposal. The fact that the Church is no longer a moral majority is liberating; it allows us to rediscover the heart of the Christian event. The Church will survive and thrive only through Her witness.
Arguably, though, there are a lot of Catholics who do not find it “liberating” that the Church is no longer the moral majority. Many are actually afraid of this phenomenon, and feel as though Catholics either have to isolate from culture or hold even more tightly to the tenets of Christianity as an increasingly extreme counter-witness. What do you say to this?
That the Church is no longer the moral majority is a fact. It’s useless to complain. The fact that many Catholics are afraid of this situation shows the lack of certainty in the unarmed beauty of faith, causing them to either isolate themselves from the culture to ‘preserve’ the faith, or to see their presence in society as a counter-reaction. To describe what kind of presence is needed today, this observation may be useful:
When we have to defend something in the context of a debate, in order to make our response stronger, we almost unconsciously accept the way the other frames the issue. In doing so, we allow our position to be determined by its opposition. It is reactive instead of being an original position, that is, a position that comes from our experience of faith. This leads to further reducing Christianity, or its testimony, to the mere repetition of a doctrine, of some values or ethics. (Disarming Beauty, pp. 70-71).
Christian faith was born in a pluralistic society in Palestine and spread throughout a multicultural Roman empire. The first Christians based the communication of their faith only in their own witness. Their free and joyful position sprang from the core of their faith, not from fear of the world. “Man today expects, perhaps unconsciously, the experience of an encounter with people for whom the fact of Christ is such a present reality that their life is changed. What will shake up men and women today is a human impact; an event that echoes the initial event, when Jesus raised His eyes and said, ‘Zacchaeus, hurry down. I mean to stay at your house today.’” (Luigi Giussani to the Synod on the Laity, 1987).
You reference the malaise of “lethargy and existential boredom.” How do modern men and women regain a sense of wonder and desire in front of their lives? In your view, what is the first step, and what is Church’s role in this?
The first step is to encounter somebody who reawakens us from our lethargy and boredom. Regardless of the human situation, something unforeseen is always possible, something unexpected, which makes us regain the sense of ourselves. The Church has a unique possibility to offer a big contribution to the modern situation if she rediscovers the real nature of Christianity as an event, an event that reawakens the person, just as we see in the Gospels.
How do you encounter someone who awakens you? Is there a danger of moral subjectivity, here? Does one just follow anything that attracts?
You can see this when you meet someone who awakens you in your own experience like when you fall in love with someone. You don’t need anybody else assuring you that it is that particular person who has awakened you from your apathy, or your meaningless life. It’s something objective, something that comes out of you. We can use the same method looking at the origin of Christian faith. As then-Cardinal Ratzinger said in 1993: “we can recognize only something that raises a correspondence in us.” Anybody can recognize Christ “because he corresponds to the nature of man…the longing for the infinite which is alive and unquenchable within man.” In the opening lines of Deus Caritas Est, he brought this to everyone’s attention: “Being Christian is not an ethical choice or a lofty idea, but the encounter with an event, a person who gives life a new horizon and a decisive direction.” The person of Jesus is such a great and precious good, as He alone fully corresponds to the human thirst for happiness. And, the exceptional correspondence He brings about in those who meet him makes them capable of being in relationship with reality in an absolutely gratuitous way.
You speak of dialogue in the book a lot. How is this possible and why is it essential?
Dialogue is crucial because it is the possibility for a person to enter into a relationship with the other’s experience. Sharing our own experiences with others, welcoming the experiences of others, is the only way to enrich our life.
Freedom in dialogue comes from the esteem one has for the experience of the other. This esteem permits one to enter into relationship with the richness of the experience of another person – in order to enrich one’s own perspective. We can say with Terence: “Nothing human is foreign to us.” And when one has this certainty, he or she has no problem entering into a dialogue.
Why is it important for Christians to defend religious freedom?
Because of the relationship between truth and freedom. The Second Vatican Council enables us see that there is no other way to communicate truth than through freedom. Reason is the nature of truth, and truth needs only its own beauty to communicate itself. “The truth cannot impose itself except by virtue of its own truth.”
Christian faith requires the use of reason and freedom. Without these two, Christianity isn’t the least bit interesting. Today, therefore, only in a free environment will Christian faith be able to interest people, because for modern men and women (and in this the Enlightenment has played a foundational role), there is no greater good than freedom. No one today would think of proposing or imposing something that goes against freedom.
With the collapse of what was at one time evident (family, marriage, work, relative peace in our cities), where do we begin again?
The same way they did 2000 years ago, with a witness. Jesus introduced such a newness in history that people who met Him remained speechless, even to the point to saying: “We have never have seen anything like it.” There is no way to challenge human reason and freedom other then a life – the more fascinating life of a witness. People need to see and touch again, in a tangible way, the values that today are in crisis.
[…]
Totally misguided and wrong action by the bishop. Fear of the law being rightly enforced against you does not excuse you from Mass attendance. Those who are hiding from ICE are guilty of being in the country illegally; they are guilty of violating immigration law. How is that possibly understood as an excuse not to attend Mass? The bishop is pandering. The bishop would not excuse people who are guilty of other crimes from Mass attendance because they didn’t want to venture outside their homes lest law enforcement apprehend them.
Let’s get this straight: is the bishop condoning violating immigration laws? He seems to think it’s wrong for law enforcement to apprehend and prosecute for immigration crimes. I have no respect for any bishop who cannot bring himself to use the word “illegal” in conjunction with “immigration” or “alien”. This bishop is an example of such.
The bishop is emoting about “standing with immigrant communities” without acknowledging that illegal aliens have brought this on themselves by attempting to evade immigration laws and/or not regularizing their legal residency, thinking that the law does not apply to them.
I voted for this enforcement. I voted for Trump. These actions by ICE are exactly what I voted for. Illegal aliens have their willful violations of immigration law and the Democrat Party’s open border, sanctuary city, and lax enforcement policies to blame. It’s now time to face reality under a law and order administration.
Meanwhile, the Vatican does not tolerate illegal immigration into its own territory. See how it threatens illegals:
Vatican Promises Stiff Penalties for Illegal Aliens Crossing its Border
https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2025/01/16/vatican-promises-stiff-penalties-for-illegal-aliens-crossing-its-border
What a bunch of political horse manure. Bishop Rojas ought to be ashamed of himself.
As if criminals, gang members, and cartel guys are going to be at Mass on Sundays.
With guys like Bishop Rojas leading our dioceses, no wonder weekly Mass attendance is at an all time low.
The problem is more about ordinary folks waiting on asylum hearings, etc. who’ve been rounded up, detained, & then let go. I totally get what ICE is doing as far as criminals & gang members but some other people have been detained that needn’t have been. Stuff happens, mistakes are made but it still must be pretty traumatic to go through.
Those who operate the bleeding heart blue states and sanctuary cities are absolutely the ones responsible for this situation. The ICE folks warned that if blue cities and states continued to ignore ICE detainers and refused to turn over criminal illegals for deportation, but instead released them into the communities, that more “ordinary” illegals would get swept up in the more dangerous process of street arrests. Those illegals are the collateral damage resulting from the lefts self righteous belief that they are correct to defend rapists and murderers and gang members from the punishment due them, in the form of deportation. While ICE has a focus on arresting the “worst of the worst” it is also NOT ok to be here illegally just because you mow lawns and are not a gang banger. If you as a hard working illegal come into view while they are in your neighborhood arresting a gang member, you may indeed get arrested. Because you have no right to be here either. Get it??
Its hard to respect a Bishop who essentially says its ok to escape the consequences of your sins. And breaking the law in this case is indeed an illegality and a sin. Rendering to caesar means obeying the law. A little bit of stealing is not ok, a little bit of sex abuse is not ok, a little bit of ANY sin is not ok, a little bit of slander or lying is NOT ok. If someone robs your home and then is caught, he is not allowed to keep his ill gotten gains just because he is used to possessing it, or has possessed it for a long time, and his neighbors have asserted he is a “nice guy”. Get it? .
It is horrifying to see a Bishop excusing this behavior when he should be advising these people to self deport home and try to return legally. When people think the rules dont apply to them, and they can make their own chaos reigns and civilization breaks down.
They are here illegally. They should return and follow proper immigration protocols, which include asking for asylum in the first country they come to, which is usually not the US
These bishops used to be laughable. They’re no longer even funny. Pitiable, yes; funny, no.
The bishop bespeaks a “Covid-Stay-at-Home” mentality.
Let us pray: O Lord, give us worthy shepherds.
How ironic (but very understandable given the nature of our fallen nature) that the very ones who championed “religious freedom “ are at the same time selectively denying it. Oh what fools we mortals be.
Whether the Bishop agrees or not, these individuals are being arrested for an illegal act – illegal entry into this country. He clearly disagrees and is free to make his case as vigorously as he chooses, but facilitation of illegality crosses the line, and in itself becomes illegal, and this also clearly is his intention.
I hope that’s not the case. If this deportation effort has changed from deporting dangerous criminals to arresting ordinary workers who came in the wrong way but have otherwise clean records & have been productive members of our communities then I wouldn’t support it. I’m more in agreement with Ronald Reagan & Rick Perry on this issue. They were/are conservatives with a heart.
You can get arrested for traffic infractions and unpaid tolls, even if you have an otherwise clean record and are a productive member of society.
There are two possible methods for illegal immigrants: make them legal, or deport them. Making them legal has been tried before, and was followed up by a gradual, then sudden, cessation of enforcement of immigration law – the stuff that keeps the cartels and terrorists out. Their continued residence as an illegal underclass contributes to creating a refuge where the cartels and terrorists can hide and abuse their neighbors with no fear of the police being called, not to mention a steady stream of income from the perfectly ordinary illegal workers who have otherwise clean records.
Traffic fines are not felonies or the sort of heinous crimes associated with cartels.
We need a secure border but we can deal humanely with folks who have been in the workforce for years and kept clean records. It benefits everyone. Especially with the looming demographic shrinking we face.
I was comparing unpaid traffic fines, which can get you arrested, with illegal immigration, which can get you arrested.
You can deal humanely with people and arrest them.
A demographic increase can be orchestrated in 3 ways: end contraception, end pornography, and increase LEGAL immigration. A permanent underclass is not beneficial. A refusal to enforce the immigration laws will result in a permanent underclass regardless of how many more amnesty laws get passed.
I wish we could solve our demographic crisis by outlawing contraception but that horse left the barn generations ago. We’re reaping the harvest.
Too mush haste leads to overstep and I think this is not good. Illegals have a lot of useful background information that would stabilize law enforcement and show better who among them could be legitimized the more easily and quickly. The authorities have to go on trust with the legal interlocutors/intermediations; and anyway in this process will learn even more.
Two contrasting movies might bear out some of the issues.
In The Lineup with Eli Wallach, you see well-organized crime chasing a lucrative criminal trade mixed into legitimate trade and travel; smuggling needing in-depth and committed long-term investigation to uncover what is deeply hidden, a lot of it out of reach. The detective/police work is hard-nosed, matter-of-fact and relentless.
In Border Blues with Gary Busey, you have multiple disparate intersecting character lines involved in more or less innocent pursuit incidentally complicating the search for a serial bomber. Some of the detective/police work is a bit fly-by-night for which L.A. got a notoriety; albeit everyone is on board, consistent and persistent.
Please note Border Blues is a basically “clean” movie as I saw it on YOUTUBE with an instance of verbal profanity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lineup_(film)
https://www.thefilmcatalogue.com/films/border-blues
The bishop quotes canon law having to do with “Spiritual Goods” but actually seems to be dispensing them from the Sunday Mass obligation for their temporal good of not being arrested for the crime of being in the United States illegally.
What part about they are here illegally, against the law, does this Bishop not understand.
Typical Church State Politics that we’ve seen for the past many years….is this a “sanctuary” situation? It’s ok to break a just law? What is his Excellencies status…??!!
Not to ever worry that this Bishop will ever die for his Faith.
“We shall continue America’s tradition as a land that welcomes peoples from other countries. We shall also, with other countries, continue to share in the responsibility of welcoming and resettling those who flee oppression.
At the same time, we must ensure adequate legal authority to establish control over immigration: to enable us, when sudden influxes of foreigners occur, to decide to whom we grant the status of refugee or asylee; to improve our border control; to expedite (consistent with fair procedures and our Constitution) return of those coming here illegally; to strengthen enforcement of our fair labor standards and laws; and to penalize those who would knowingly encourage violation of our laws. The steps we take to further these objectives, however, must also be consistent with our values of individual privacy and freedom.
We have a special relationship with our closest neighbors, Canada and Mexico. Our immigration policy should reflect this relationship.
We must also recognize that both the United States and Mexico have historically benefited from Mexicans obtaining employment in the United States. A number of our States have special labor needs, and we should take these into account.
Illegal immigrants in considerable numbers have become productive members of our society and are a basic part of our work force. Those who have established equities in the United States should be recognized and accorded legal status. At the same time, in so doing, we must not encourage illegal immigration.
We shall strive to distribute fairly, among the various localities of this country, the impacts of our national immigration and refugee policy, and we shall improve the capability of those agencies of the Federal Government which deal with these matters.
We shall seek new ways to integrate refugees into our society without nurturing their dependence on welfare.
Finally, we recognize that immigration and refugee problems require international solutions. We will seek greater international cooperation in the resettlement of refugees and, in the Caribbean Basin, international cooperation to assist accelerated economic development to reduce motivations for illegal immigration.
Immigration and refugee policy is an important part of our past and fundamental to our national interest. With the help of the Congress and the American people, we will work towards a new and realistic immigration policy, a policy that will be fair to our own citizens while it opens the door of opportunity for those who seek a new life in America.”
Ronald Reagan
Date
07/31/1981
I LOVED Ronald Reagan, but knew this immigration law he agreed to was a huge mistake. The amnesty only encouraged more of them to come, hoping for an amnesty themselves.
From Wikipedia:”Despite the passage of the act, the population of undocumented immigrants rose from 5 million in 1986 to 11.1 million in 2013.[16] In 1982, the Supreme Court forbade schools to deny services based on illegal immigration status in Plyler v. Doe. In 1986, Reagan signed the Emergency Medical Treatment and Active Labor Act (EMTALA), which forbade hospitals from denying emergency care services based on immigration status.”
In other words, they came in droves and ever since have been a major financial burden on the country. As for the jobs that “Americans wont do”,–well, who do you think did them before we were inundated with illegals, undercutting wages? They are without question a financial burden on the entire nation.” This needs to end. Illegals need to understand that WE get to decide to gets into the US.
I hope Trump does not start giving carve out exemptions to certain businesses like agriculture who want to use illegal labor. . At best, they should be given work permits which can be revoked, but NEVER the right to vote.
Poor folks, new immigrants, and slaves have done those sorts of agricultural jobs in the past LJ. And occasionally convicts .
It’s very difficult to find US citizens who will do that kind of labor or who can do it dependably. Ditto for many service industry jobs.
I personally think we should do our own work, too but that’s not what most Americans are looking for these days. Fewer Mexicans also. I read that as the standard of living in Mexico has risen US farmers have to seek workers from further away.
To our beloved bishops: Obviously you want the chaos and human trafficking of the past four years. You do not care that children have disappeared and are sexually exploited. You stand with the the cartels that made millions of dollars on expediting illegal immigration and profiting from human misery. And you are willing to tolerate the mass migration and misery brought on by open, unmanaged borders.
Or is it you just hate Trump?
Probably both.
Good. Maybe now they can discontinue Spanish Masses since no one will be attending.
Why would they discontinue Spanish Masses?
I’ve been attending those since the 1970s and so have lots of US citizens.
Mass attendance in Spanish down because the faithful fear deportation? Proves beyond all possible doubt Trump and Miller’s claim that “illegals” are Islamist terrorists, rapists and murderers. Shame, shame shame.
Would ICE raid churches? Probably not. Churches are sanctuaries, going back to the Middle Ages. ICE should not violate this principle. The idea of armed ICE agents entering a Church is reprehensible. ICE should make this clear. Churches are off limits.
I doubt Mass raids would happen because it could put the rest of the congregation in danger of crossfire. It seems better practice to arrest offenders as they enter or exit Mass.
We had a gunman try to enter a Mass in our diocese a few years ago but thankfully a member of the congregation wrassled him to the ground until law enforcement came. The officers told everyone to duck down for cover in case there was a 2nd gunman inside. Thankfully that wasn’t the case.
No. No arrests on Church property. Do it elsewhere. Church is a sanctuary. Any arrests on Church property is a step towards Fascism.
If there’s a gunman, law enforcement has no other choice. Otherwise it’s much more prudent & respectful to make arrests outside of church.
So the bishop is telling me that rather than attend Mass more often to ask God for His protection, I should run away from the law, and now from Him because the truth isn’t going to be on my side?
This bishop has all the sophistication of thought about law, justice, and morality that Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson has. Two ways to deal with such a person in a position of influence: mockery or dismissiveness. Both this bishop and Ketanji have views that possess no merit.
If you are in my nation unlawfully you are owed neither my empathy nor my sympathy. My moral obligation is to the eradication of such lawlessness, as directed by my constitutionally protected Christian faith, as directed by my nations history and traditions.
Obviously the good bishop should be counseling those among his flock who have sinned by breaking a legitimate law to turn themselves in to the proper authorities or take advantage of the policy which allows them to return to their homeland and apply for LEGAL immigration to the United States…with a $1,000 in their back pocket.
Yes, sinned. By their actions illegal aliens are placing themselves ahead of the line for all sort of benefits designed for the aid of American citizens. They are robbing disadvantaged citizens of aid to which they alone are entitled.
It would appear that while the good bishop received his academic theological training he was never catechized.
Can’t be a pastor without catechesis.
Very proper dispensation by the Bishop of San Bernardino. As in the times of the catacombs Catholics are under persecution. Now ten million of them are threatened with deportation for a misdemeanour like jaywalking. It’s saddening to see other Christians applauding the persecution of these hardworking fellow believers just because the WASP establishment fears them. This is the real motive behind this spectacle. It’s all pointless in any case. Last month only sixteen thousand were deported. Sixteen million to go. It’s just another political stunt that will divide the country in the long term.
“…just because the WASP establishment fears them.”
Keeping it classy and fact-based. Nice. (Ahem.)
It’s an issue that can’t be avoided, the facts you are concerned about. The United States has amnestied millions of Catholic “illegal” Hispanic migrants before without any threat to its integrity. It is simply dishonest for Trump and Stephen Miller to talk about Islamic terrorists, rapists and drug traffickers when almost the entirety of the 10 million plus Hispanic Catholics who live in the United States with irregular status work hard. Like the 30% of US citizens who have “form” for “crimes” of varying gravity, some also trespass. But obviously this isn’t the real reason for continuing this cruel political stunt which is only damaging the US (while gratifying a minority, it’s true). Time and time again the real motive comes out, and it’s got nothing to do with the law of Christian ethics: they don’t assimilate properly into the dominant WASP culture. It’s time for the United States to address its bi-cultural reality. Like Canada, it is a bi-lingual country (23% Hispanics in the US, 19% Francophones in Canada). London regognised this reality in Canada in the nineteenth century, and Canada has continued this. The US now needs to do what it had already done in New Mexico, afford official status to Hispanic civilisation by virtue of its continuous (indeed prior) existence and contemporary strength. This wont kill the US. Continuing to provoke 80 million of its own people with this cruel stunt will have terrible effects if prolonged. I’m not talking about liberal “multiculturalism”, but something people who read a publication like this one ought to be thinking about, rather than lifting the terms of the debate from the dominant social and political caste, which has no interest in the Christian West
Mr. Cervantes, when is the last time you visited the States? The days of “WASP” culture are in the past.
Illegal aliens are not hard working and they are not being persecuted. They are here in violation of federal law. It is necessary and appropriate for them to be deported.
Tennessee’s law provides for 30 days jail for jaywalking. I’ll wager many more than 30,000 a month would be arrested if it were applied, which is the number of arrests ICE can manage at the moment. The law isn’t the real motive. The migrants’ Catholic, Hispanic civilisation is.
Tennessee jay walking laws were made to catch illegal immigrants? Or US state laws are enforced for that reason?
Being in the US without proper documentation is reason enough.
Jaywalking is not a threat to our national security.
Nor are millions of Catholics working to put food on your table.
Migrant workers who came to our area work very hard indeed. But yes, they are here in violation of the law.
I hope we can find a way to make them legit, at least with temporary work permits so they can get their jobs done. Especially for agriculture. Crops and livestock can’t wait.
Complete fearmongering and hysteria. Firstly, Christians in Nigeria and the Middle East continue to attend Mass despite facing actual persecution (i.e violence at the hands of Radical Islamists).
Secondly, fearing consequences for breaking the law is not persecution. Being a criminal doesn’t make you a “victim”.
Thirdly, breaking the law is a sin, so these illegals need to go to confession.
Finally, the Catechism teaches that immigrants need to accept the laws of their host country and show gratitude, not a sense of entitlement. The Bishop is violating Church teaching by protecting ingrates who forced their way into the country.
I thought my comment points to a need to harmonize the issue on a scale. Just being an illegal is, “as a crime” and/or “as moral offense”, is on the very low end of the scale of priorities.
Another interesting movie description about immigration is Men In Black 1997, there at the beginning, when MIB had to zone in on the worst threat. (I am not advocating on “necessary inevitable violence” either.)
I have always argued elsewhere that immigrants present many positive opportunities. BUT that it had to be ordered to right flourishing. Obviously, it’s people and futures involved.
The reactionary approach is the opposite, it is time-consuming, divisive, facilitative of more expert bad elements who skip over it and manipulate it, up-ending of the positive opportunities, costly, sterile, sterilizing of local officials.
In other words you’re “PUTTING BACK” EVERYBODY and the new economy but you imagine it’s “so wise” and “well-feathered”.
Also, I have hit out at international organizations on emigration and mass cross-border movements, for being slack, lugubrious, always behind the curve, self-involved bureaucracies -ultimately inhumane and anti-economy serving entrenched interests within and in the private sector.
“Just being an illegal is, “as a crime” and/or “as moral offense”, is on the very low end of the scale of priorities.”
*********
I agree Mr. Galy. Before this issue became so politicized & illegal immigration became so massive I don’t think it was on too many people’s radar.
The Government shouldn’t be able to take people from Church sanctuaries against their will. I always thought that they were places of refuge in this country the same as foreign embassies.
There are no such sanctuary laws in the states. If illegals are hiding in churches, they are subject to deportation.
I think sanctuary is a good tradition but it worked that way more in the past.
Temporary work permit is a brilliant idea mrscracker. It’s a way to bring the situation under some clear-sighted management and organization -a big section of it. But it mustn’t be a ruse. What they could do ahead of advertising it is, publish a list of qualifying and semi-qualifying attributes that would be applicable with additional caveats: that people would be able to repeat temporary work if not made permanent immediately, that they would be re-engaged in temporary status for mere visits and that they would not be black-listed for merely having crossed the border, etc., etc., etc. The temporary work permit could be granted as a matter of right for individuals not themselves under the pale of serious suspicion of crime.
Temporary work permits weren’t my idea of course but possibly Donald Trump’s. Or his advisors. We’d have a huge crisis in those US industries if everyone here illegally was deported.
We shouldn’t be in this situation in the first place & we have ourselves to blame as well as the border crossers & the cartels who brought them here. Everyone played a part. Secure borders & safe & a legal immigration/work visa process benefits everyone. (Except the cartels.)