This isn’t a new comparison, but we usually see it from liberal politicians pandering to their base before Christmas, not from Catholic priests. Fr. John Korcsmar of the Diocese of Austin compared illegal immigrants to Joseph, Mary, and Jesus fleeing Herod.
Mining the depths of what it means to be a Catholic, the Rev. John Korcsmar broached the subject of illegal immigration on a recent Sunday morning at Dolores Catholic Church in East Austin. Consider, he asked parishioners, that Jesus, Mary and Joseph were refugees fleeing King Herod’s terror.
There are a few differences. For one thing, the Holy Family was fleeing an attempt on Jesus’ life by Herod at God’s command, not illegally entering the US for economic reasons.
As the reader who sent me the link said:
Most people would agree that Christians have an obligation to shield refugees seeking shelter from a murderous tyrant who wishes to kill their children. It strikes me as immoral and blasphemous to imply that by that same reasoning we are all obligated to shield illegal immigrants from Mexico.
I have no problem with immigration. It’s uncontrolled, illegal immigration that I have a problem with, including the strain that millions of poverty-stricken individuals outside the system (i.e. not paying taxes) put on our institutions. And for their own sake, many of these people are taken advantage of by the unscrupulous smugglers who bring them in, working to death in the fields, factories, or brothels. How does that serve their inherent rights and human dignity?
Perhaps we should spend more time asking how we can improve their conditions at home so they don’t have to flee over a dangerous border-crossing while we keep ourselves protected from drug smugglers and terrorists.
Technorati Tags: Catholic, immigration, politics
Well the comparison to the Holy Family is misplaced. Dom is correct that we ought to spend some time trying to improve the lot of the immigrant.
In spite of my ultra-conservative, unreconstructed Confederate, Tridentine, ultramontane tendencies I must say I am not bothered one bit about poor Mexicans and Brazilians coming here. It is immoral for us to deny hardworking people better lives. The US immigration policies are utterly irrational. There is plenty of room for them – if there were no opportunities they would not come. They HAVE to pay taxes – via their rent, sales tax, gas tax, etc. Given that they make low wages their actual income tax share would be minimal anyway. Often they have no insurance because they cannot afford it – but that has nothing to do with their immigration status – no poor man can afford the $1000/month it costs for health insurance.
And I love it when some local school board idiot complains that – gasp – the immigrants have children – yuck – and they want to send them to school! The same school that is paid for by the taxes on the apartments immigrants rent and whose lawns are mowed by immigrants in a neighborhood in which nearly all home construction is done by immigrants (thus raising home values and sending tax revenue through the roof). Burden indeed.
I’m not opposed to immigration. I am opposed to illegal immigration, i.e. having laws we don’t intend to enforce. That puts immigrants into a bind such that if someone takes advantage of them they don’t want to turn to authorities because they don’t want to be deported.
I also think we should have limits. While America can and should welcome newcomers, the capacity to absorb newcomers into our society is not unlimited. When my grandparents came, they broke their ties to the old country and learned English and became American.
While many immigrants today still do that, many refuse to learn or speak English, still think of themselves as citizens of their original country, and even vote in their elections. It’s got to the point that foreign politicians are campaigning in American cities!
That strikes at the very concept of nationality and nationhood.
Though we do need some work in regards to our asylum polices in cases that more closely mirror the situation of the Holy Family. If your a prenant Chinese women requesting asylum because if you are returned home they will kill your child – we turn them away.
I also wonder how much responsibilities those who live in countries that are less well off economically have towards working to improve those conditions instead of just fleeing. As long as we make illegal immigration so enticing we discourage actual improvements of true economic reform.
I agree, Dom. We have immigration laws for a reason. To suggest that we open our borders to all comers is to create economic and social chaos. Invariably immigrants need services they don’t pay for. Medical services are just one area where this is true. When the immigrants have access to medical services that citizens can’t afford for themselves, and those same citizens pay the taxes that provide those services to illegal immigrants, justice is not being served.
Operating apart from the law not only makes immigrants vulnerable to abuse, it also sets up a sub-culture that enables those who belong to avoid the law. The whole concept of operating illegally that is begun by an illegal border crossing doesn’t suddenly evaporate once the alien steps foot on American soil. If he can be exploited, he can also exploit. The horror stories that we hear about people arranging the border crossings are a sort of example of this. Operating within the law is important for everyone.
Neither is it reasonable to exempt immigrants from learning to blend into our culture. They come here because they want the good things our culture provides while at the same time they reject parts of it. Language is one good example. It’s a package deal. Take it or leave it.
In reality our Economy would not work without the added low wage labor that immigrants provide.
Our LEGAL immigration quotas are extremely biased toward W. Europe and far below the demand in the US economy.
What we need to do is provide for ways people from the rest of the world can come to the US to work legally and then go home. We also need to raise immigration quotas, and we need to start enforcing our laws to end the labor black market. Every worker should be paid some reasonable minimum wage in the US, they should pay taxes, and they should recieve a certain amount of protection from the US government. But none of this can happen if we don’t accept that we need these immigrants for our economy to grow.
One way or the other, Jesus was born in a semi-independant Tetrarchy of the Roman Empire. Herod ruled at the pleasure of Rome, so Jesus’s Illegal immigration is more like “sneaking” across the border of the District of Columbia into
Maryland??!
And, correct me if I am wrong, but as far as I know, unless you were an exile or enemy army, there were no immigration laws in the Roman legal code.
My feelings are similar to those expressed by Michael Shea above.
My observation is that there will always be immigrants from south of the border as long as people are oppressed.
While some Mexican officials and activists here in the U.S cry racism over the plight of illegals in this country, most seem to be seeking a better life for themselves and their families. A better life that is hopelessly off limits to them in their home countries because of corrupt officials.
The rights and wrongs of immigration policy are not the point. Reasonable people can agree or disagree about our immigration law and remain within Christian teaching.
What is objectionable here is Fr. Korcsmar’s attempt to equate the plight of Jesus, Mary and Joseph with the situation of economic immigrants from Mexico. The comparison is groundless, and attempts to equate the two demonstrate an inability to make simple moral distinctions.
Deliberate, illegal immigration, when not caused by persecution, is a sin against justice. Those wishing to legally immigrate to the United States must spend months and, often years, standing in long lines at US Consulates. They must produce all sorts of documents and complete arduous paperwork. When someone comes here illegally, it is a form of theft from those who have acted in a just and legal manner. It’s rather as if many of us were standing in a long slow line in the hot sun or bitter cold and, all of a sudden, new people snuck right in ahead of us.
The greatest problem with illegal immigration comes from Mexico. The US-Mexican border is a dangerously volatile flashpoint for major violence. Farms, ranches, US military bases, Indian reservations are being trashed daily by illegal immigrants. Uniformed Mexican troops have been seen recently in US territory and have had some encounters with our law enforcement officials.
The Mexican government has a unbroken reputation for being one of the most inefficient, ineffective, corrupt governments on the earth in its nearly two centuries of existence. It is its people’s own worst enemy and perhaps one of ours as well. No amount of coddling, economic and cultural ties, joint Democratic/Republican massaging seems to do any good. The government is a master at deception and corruption. But that is not justification for illegal immigration.
We are more a nation of immigrants now than in 1900 when the huge waves came from Europe including my parents. One high school near me gets flags for its international day from United Airlines. At last count, there were students carrying flags from 72 different countries. As an American born citizen, I am a minority in my own immediate neighborhood—a fact I delight in, but one that is amazing as it mostly occurred in two short decades.
Legal Mexican immigrants often have a great deal of resentment against those coming here illegally. The legal Mexican immigrants worked long hard hours to increase the wage scale, pay their taxes and build up their homes and businesses that are often undercut by illegal immigrants.
Our government has a moral obligation to provide for “domestic tranquility.” And there is a level of absorption beyond which everyone starts to suffer in many ways. This is being reached now in a number of institutions, hospital ERs for example. Many hospitals in Southern CA are closing their ERs as they will otherwise have to close the hospital. Increasing numbers of crimes are being committed by illegal immigrants.
We are a nation of immigrants…actually since no humans originated in the Americas, a hemisphere of immigrants, whether 20,000 years or 20 seconds ago. And we need sane, enforceable immigration policies that include screening for contagious diseases, bringing in vermin, or materials that may affect our health and well-being. These things cannot be done with millions of people sneaking into the United States. A conservative estimate is now, I believe, 11 million illegal immigrants from Mexico alone.
As for the Roman Empire at the time that Joseph, Mary and Jesus fled from Bethlehem to Egypt, the entire spectrum of circumstances are so utterly radically different as to negagte any comparison. And anyone, priest or layman, who makes that comparison just doean’t know what they are talking about.
Michael Shea:
I don’t disagree with you about immigration. My grandparents were LEGAL immigrants. I just want you, and the immigrants, to work within the law. Is THAT “utterly irrational”?
If you want to change the law, do it. If you think we should have open borders, work for them. I could respect that.
But to accept anarchy when it suits our ideas about what is moral and immoral doesn’t help this country OR the immigrants, illegal or otherwise.
And your comment about the “idiots” on the school board was supported by ideas and arguments that called to mind the admonition to people living in glass houses.
Sorry for the second post, everybody.
I just wanted to add that when Joseph and Mary went to Bethlehem, they were there because they were following the law. I only bring this up to show the disposition of Joseph and Mary with regard to following the law of the land, even under Roman rule.
As for the escape to Egypt, does anyone believe that borders were thought of in the same way, as we do today? I mean did people skulk around because they had arrived in Judea illegally? I don’t buy it. Although, I don’t know diddly about roman immigration law, etc., so take it for what it’s worth.
Lastly, to imply that Mary was complicit in intentionally breaking a law has some implications theological, n’est pas?
Davinci,
I appreciate your confidence in my ability to change the law – so – let it be done – all Christian men and women of good character who seek to live in the USA are hereby granted citizenship! Also, the Federal income tax is hereby declared illegal, local police are to begin arresting abortionists for murder and all schools are to devote one hour per day to reading G.K. Chesterton.
I agree that the law is important and is to be followed. I am fairly sure your grandparents would not be able to immigrate to the US today – unless they were grad students or some such thing. The problem is that we have unenforced immigration laws. The moment they are enforced Congress will be forced to change them because we will have no fruit, no meat, no canned fish, no new construction and the public school lawns will be mysteriously unmowed. The law is today corrupt. It has created a class of laborers with no rights. It is the laws and their enforcement that is utterly irrational. A good first step would be to return to the immigration laws in effect when your grandparents arrived.
My comment about idiotic school officals is sincere. I hear their arguments frequently. As far as local school operations go the immigration status of the parents of the children is completely irrelevant. The immigrants pay exactly the same local taxes as anyone else. The proponents are therefore either idiots or – maybe – they just do not want any Mexicans in their school and are too squeamish to say so.
Michael,
I have complete confidence in your ability to work for a change in the law. Almost all of the examples you site, I would work right alongside you. Although Chesterton should be optional. Compulsory reading always takes the joy out of it, IMO.
I completely agree with your view of existing law being ignored, effectively making immigration policy “lawless”.
The only thing I can’t agree with you about:
1. Using “legal” and “illegal” immigration interchangeably to make your arguments. They aren’t the same thing on any level. Notably with regard to taxation.
2. That “amnesty” is the answer. Reagan tried it before, and it did solve one problem – taxation. I just think the reality of the economic vacuum (high pressure to low pressure) between the first and third worlds is far more complex than people imagine.
In the long term, maybe open borders make sense. I don’t know. I do know, though, from Roman history, what unchecked immigration and polyglotism can do to a culture and economy. As a Catholic, should I even take that into account? Dunno.
I am a Catholic that happens, by grace, to live in the U.S. I do my best to be a good citizen, and make good choices politically. But my LIFE is in the Church, so I don’t get too worked up about this kind of stuff.
My father fought in WWII against the Japanese. He lost a lot of friends over Burma. Had friends that endured years in Japanese prison camps. Gruesome. Forty years later, I was working for a Japanese company. A lot of blood spilled for what? Was it worth it? How does one even calculate that kind of cost to benefit ratio? Do young people even stop to think about the sacrifice these people made? Even on Veteran’s Day?
So, I’m not an ideologue. I just try to look at the biggest picture I can get a handle on. For example, what does changing border/immigration policy mean, if the Mexican government remains a corrupt oligarchy? Can we make one decision without looking at the broad matrix of causes and effects that have made the U.S. the most powerful economy in world history, and left the rest of the world, to varying degrees, limping behind?
I guess, if the borders were opened, and the economy tanked, I could immigrate to the next best place to be. Then I’d know what these people are up against.
God’s will be done.
I mentioned above that I have a degree of sympathy towards illegals as it seems—to me at least—that many are seeking to improve their lot in life as their home countries are corrupt and oppressive.
My wife has a harder view towards them, as she recently became a US citizen and it comes back to the point raised in the comments above our laws not being enforced.
The citizenship process was very frustrating with all the paper work (much of it requesting copies of the same documents over and over), the long delays and periods of time with little news on the application status, and the over $2000 we spent of fees and paying a legal office for some work in the beginning.
My wife wondered why she went through this given the influx of illegal immigrants living and working in our country. Of course she can vote now and has already received a jury duty summons.
Well Dom needs to consult with his Texan, Southern Wife. She could fill him on the history of how the territory was taken by force from them Mexicans. Perhaps we shoud go back to the times when we hearded those dirty Mexican women across the border in El Paso so they could clean our houses and cook our meals. They were run though a room where they had to remove all their clothing and were doused with chemicals to remove the vermin which they carried. No stay on an island in New York for these filthy people.
Ju know we jus send em back. Then ju goina mow my grass, cook de food at de resturant, build my house, pick my lettice, pick up my trash, kill de chickens and take off de feathers. Ju know sometime I pay him and sometimes I say too bad no money this time. And when I need de money how I goina get it when Juan gone and I cana find ime to beat him up and take de money in his pocket because he can no get bank.
When I need woman who take care my needs when Maria and others not at street corner.
Maybe some this makes Father concern.
No, I’m already quite aware of the history of Texas, at least pretty well for a Yank.
But isn’t that the point of trying to end illegal immigration? If people are here legally then they have the protection of the law. If they’re here illegally they can be and are taken advantage of.
What people did in the past is not necessarily an indicator of how it must be in the future. Surely we can end illegal immigration without returning to the days of importing exploited guest workers.
What makes no sense is having laws on the books that everyone ignores. It breaks down respect for the rule of law and creates an exploitable underclass. That’s good for no one.
This is an old post, but I came across it while reading about Trumps new immigration policy. I’d have to disagree with you. Allow me to explain why.
There were no immigration laws during that time, at least not in their region.
If there had been, they would have likely been monitored by Herod, and if Joseph and Mary were to proceed by the laws of immigration, they would have had to fill out forms signifying her pregnancy. It is also very likely they would have been detained and killed, considering the reach and power of Herod’s murderous campaign.
In that line of logic, its reasonable to believe they may have chosen to escape to Egypt “illegally” if there were immigration laws in effect.
Whatever you think they might have done, the fact is that they weren’t illegal immigrants and they were emigrating to Bethlehem because they were in the same country. In fact, you proved my point by reiterating that there were no immigrations laws then. That’s precisely why it’s a bad analogy. The situation is completely different from that of today.