USCCB on Executive Order

[McM RSCJ]

President And Vice President Of The U.S. Conference Of Catholic Bishops Stand In Defense Of All Faiths In Response To Executive Order On Refugees

January 30, 2017

 "When did we see you a stranger and welcome you?"

 

Matthew 25:38
 

 

WASHINGTON— Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), and Archbishop José H. Gomez of Los Angeles, vice president of the USCCB, have issued the following joint statement regarding the recent executive order on the new refugee policy announced by President Trump this past Friday. President Trump's executive order suspends the entry of refugees into the United States for 120 days. The order also indefinitely stops the admission of Syrian refugees and for 90 days, bars individuals from seven predominantly Muslim countries. 
 

 

Full joint statement as follows:
 

 

Over the past several days, many brother bishops have spoken out in defense of God's people. We are grateful for their witness. Now, we call upon all the Catholic faithful to join us as we unite our voices with all who speak in defense of human dignity.
 

 

The bond between Christians and Muslims is founded on the unbreakable strength of charity and justice. The Second Vatican Council in Nostra Aetate urged us to sincerely work toward a mutual understanding that would "promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom." The Church will not waiver in her defense of our sisters and brothers of all faiths who suffer at the hands of merciless persecutors.
 

 

The refugees fleeing from ISIS and other extremists are sacrificing all they have in the name of peace and freedom. Often, they could be spared if only they surrendered to the violent vision of their tormentors. They stand firm in their faith. Many are families, no different from yours or mine, seeking safety and security for their children. Our nation should welcome them as allies in a common fight against evil.  We must screen vigilantly for infiltrators who would do us harm, but we must always be equally vigilant in our welcome of friends.
 

 

The Lord Jesus fled the tyranny of Herod, was falsely accused and then deserted by his friends. He had nowhere to lay His head (Lk. 9:58). Welcoming the stranger and those in flight is not one option among many in the Christian life. It is the very form of Christianity itself.  Our actions must remind people of Jesus. The actions of our government must remind people of basic humanity.  Where our brothers and sisters suffer rejection and abandonment we will lift our voice on their behalf. We will welcome them and receive them. They are Jesus and the Church will not turn away from Him.
 

 

Our desire is not to enter the political arena, but rather to proclaim Christ alive in the world today. In the very moment a family abandons their home under threat of death, Jesus is present.  And He says to each of us, "whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me" (MT 25:40).

Edited January 31, 2017 by McM RSCJ
font siza

[Amppax]

A friend of mine posted the following on facebook, I think it is of interest for whatever discussion may follow: 

Quote

There are Catholic authors who suggest that we have no duty to assist those Muslims who are in dire need as regards their lot, beyond throwing money at them. I note this in Aquinas' Summa, re: the virtue of beneficence, IIaIIae, Q31A2 ad 3:

"The excommunicated and the enemies of the common weal are deprived of all beneficence, in so far as this prevents them from doing evil deeds. Yet if their nature be in urgent need of succor lest it fail, we are bound to help them: for instance, if they be in danger of death through hunger or thirst, or suffer some like distress, unless this be according to the order of justice."

Note that this refers also to convicted traitors. I don't think anyone is so silly as to suggest the civil war is a justice imposed on the refugees.

And in the very next article, referring to the proximity of charity, in the Respondeo:

"And yet this may vary according to the various requirements of time, place, or matter in hand: because in certain cases one ought, for instance, to succor a stranger, in extreme necessity, rather than one's own father, if he is not in such urgent need."

In case anyone thinks the "neighbor first" argument solves anything.

Now, if people have a better idea regarding how to solve their problem, let's hear it. If not, given threat to their life and limb, Christians, do your job.

7

 

[bardegaulois]

In that mode, we also ought to look at Question 105, Article 3 of the Summa, "whether judicial precepts regarding foreigners were framed in a suitable manner": http://www.newadvent.org/summa/2105.htm#article3

Quote

I answer that, Man's relations with foreigners are twofold: peaceful, and hostile: and in directing both kinds of relation the Law contained suitable precepts. For the Jews were offered three opportunities of peaceful relations with foreigners. First, when foreigners passed through their land as travelers. Secondly, when they came to dwell in their land as newcomers. And in both these respects the Law made kind provision in its precepts: for it is written (Exodus 22:21): "Thou shalt not molest a stranger [advenam]"; and again (Exodus 22:9): "Thou shalt not molest a stranger [peregrino]." Thirdly, when any foreigners wished to be admitted entirely to their fellowship and mode of worship. With regard to these a certain order was observed. For they were not at once admitted to citizenship: just as it was law with some nations that no one was deemed a citizen except after two or three generations, as the Philosopher says (Polit. iii, 1). The reason for this was that if foreigners were allowed to meddle with the affairs of a nation as soon as they settled down in its midst, many dangers might occur, since the foreigners not yet having the common good firmly at heart might attempt something hurtful to the people. Hence it was that the Law prescribed in respect of certain nations that had close relations with the Jews (viz., the Egyptians among whom they were born and educated, and the Idumeans, the children of Esau, Jacob's brother), that they should be admitted to the fellowship of the people after the third generation; whereas others (with whom their relations had been hostile, such as the Ammonites and Moabites) were never to be admitted to citizenship; while the Amalekites, who were yet more hostile to them, and had no fellowship of kindred with them, were to be held as foes in perpetuity: for it is written (Exodus 17:16): "The war of the Lord shall be against Amalec from generation to generation."

 

[Guest]

 

11 hours ago, McM RSCJ said:

President And Vice President Of The U.S. Conference Of Catholic Bishops Stand In Defense Of All Faiths In Response To Executive Order On Refugees

January 30, 2017

 "When did we see you a stranger and welcome you?"

 

Matthew 25:38
 

 

WASHINGTON— Cardinal Daniel N. DiNardo of Galveston-Houston, president of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB), and Archbishop José H. Gomez of Los Angeles, vice president of the USCCB, have issued the following joint statement regarding the recent executive order on the new refugee policy announced by President Trump this past Friday. President Trump's executive order suspends the entry of refugees into the United States for 120 days. The order also indefinitely stops the admission of Syrian refugees and for 90 days, bars individuals from seven predominantly Muslim countries. 
 

 

Full joint statement as follows:
 

 

Over the past several days, many brother bishops have spoken out in defense of God's people. We are grateful for their witness. Now, we call upon all the Catholic faithful to join us as we unite our voices with all who speak in defense of human dignity.
 

 

The bond between Christians and Muslims is founded on the unbreakable strength of charity and justice. The Second Vatican Council in Nostra Aetate urged us to sincerely work toward a mutual understanding that would "promote together for the benefit of all mankind social justice and moral welfare, as well as peace and freedom." The Church will not waiver in her defense of our sisters and brothers of all faiths who suffer at the hands of merciless persecutors.
 

 

The refugees fleeing from ISIS and other extremists are sacrificing all they have in the name of peace and freedom. Often, they could be spared if only they surrendered to the violent vision of their tormentors. They stand firm in their faith. Many are families, no different from yours or mine, seeking safety and security for their children. Our nation should welcome them as allies in a common fight against evil.  We must screen vigilantly for infiltrators who would do us harm, but we must always be equally vigilant in our welcome of friends.
 

 

The Lord Jesus fled the tyranny of Herod, was falsely accused and then deserted by his friends. He had nowhere to lay His head (Lk. 9:58). Welcoming the stranger and those in flight is not one option among many in the Christian life. It is the very form of Christianity itself.  Our actions must remind people of Jesus. The actions of our government must remind people of basic humanity.  Where our brothers and sisters suffer rejection and abandonment we will lift our voice on their behalf. We will welcome them and receive them. They are Jesus and the Church will not turn away from Him.
 

 

Our desire is not to enter the political arena, but rather to proclaim Christ alive in the world today. In the very moment a family abandons their home under threat of death, Jesus is present.  And He says to each of us, "whatever you did for one of these least brothers of mine, you did for me" (MT 25:40).

Thank you for posting, it gives much encouragement indeed and restores entirely any sagging trust in the human institution of The Church on earth.  Who are we to put first, Jesus and His Gospel........or human opinion?

And for the USCCB statement quoted..........very well said USCCB and thank you for standing up for Jesus and His Gospel. 

[Papist]

" The bond between Christians and Muslims is founded on the unbreakable strength of charity and justice."

SRSLY!?!

[Anomaly]

"We must screen vigilantly for infiltrators who would do us harm, but we must always be equally vigilant in our welcome of friends."

If people really are concerned about the plight of both immigrants and citizens, they should be intellectually honest and be calling for effort and resources to review the vetting process to assure the citizens that a proper and thorough job is being done as well as enough resources that refugees do not have to wait years.   If a proper and efficient process was established, more refugees can be brought in and welcomed with confidence and little fear by American society. Calling the "pause for vetting system review " a religious ban, slinging counterproductive rhetoric to flame passions and protests, accomplishes nothing but making this an "us" versus "them" political party fight with refugees as the cannon fodder again. 

Where is the bit of charity and spine to give Trump a bit of the benefit of the doubt AND spine to them constructively call on the administration to give $ and intellectual resources to establish a thorough and faster vetting program to reassure the citizens and get refugees out of harms way sooner?   Kind of like the USCCB calling for equal vigilance in empathy AND security. 

[bardegaulois]

11 hours ago, Papist said:

" The bond between Christians and Muslims is founded on the unbreakable strength of charity and justice."

SRSLY!?!

Indeed, they were very just to those 21 Coptic migrant workers in Libya. And to Aasia Bibi. And to the 148 killed in the attack on Garissa University College in Kenya. And to...

[McM RSCJ]

" The bond between Christians and Muslims is founded on the unbreakable strength of charity and justice."

Yes.  Seriously.  This is the teaching of the Catholic Church in our times.  The American Catholic Bishops cite Vatican II in their recent statement quote Vatican II.  

For a compilation of citations from Vatican II and Popes in our time, consult the USCCB resource: Vatican Council and Papal Statements on  Islam:   http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/interreligious/islam/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-on-islam.cfm

[Nihil Obstat]

25 minutes ago, McM RSCJ said:

Yes.  Seriously.  This is the teaching of the Catholic Church in our times.    

 

Is this different from the teaching of the Catholic Church in previous times? Just wondering.

[Peace]

3 hours ago, McM RSCJ said:

" The bond between Christians and Muslims is founded on the unbreakable strength of charity and justice."

Yes.  Seriously.  This is the teaching of the Catholic Church in our times.  The American Catholic Bishops cite Vatican II in their recent statement quote Vatican II.  

For a compilation of citations from Vatican II and Popes in our time, consult the USCCB resource: Vatican Council and Papal Statements on  Islam:   http://www.usccb.org/beliefs-and-teachings/ecumenical-and-interreligious/interreligious/islam/vatican-council-and-papal-statements-on-islam.cfm

Wait a second. You take Vatican II seriously? They allowed use of the vernacular, for Pete's sake.

[Amppax]

On 1/31/2017 at 5:27 PM, bardegaulois said:

In that mode, we also ought to look at Question 105, Article 3 of the Summa, "whether judicial precepts regarding foreigners were framed in a suitable manner": http://www.newadvent.org/summa/2105.htm#article3

 

I'm assuming, perhaps wrongly, that you're drawing your analysis of this from either Dr. Taylor Marshall or Thomas Williams articles, which both cite this article from the Summa. The same friend who wrote the analysis I posted above (he's a canon law and theology student) gave this rebuttal to that line of argumentation based on this article: 

Quote

"Regarding the article you cited, and as I noted re: Marshall and Williams - we aren't talking about amnesty and full citizenship, but refugee asylum. Aquinas in that article itself:

"For the Jews were offered three opportunities of peaceful relations with foreigners. First, when foreigners passed through their land as travelers. Secondly, when they came to dwell in their land as newcomers. And in both these respects the Law made kind provision in its precepts: for it is written (Exodus 22:21): 'Thou shalt not molest a stranger [advenam]'; and again (Exodus 22:9): 'Thou shalt not molest a stranger [peregrino].'"

These two refer in this case to tourists and long stay situations among peaceful visitors, which - if we are not assuming the worst - include those fleeing but not immediately requesting citizenship. There are rules concerning making them citizens, but for mere sojourners, the Law 'made kind provision.'

The only problems come up in questions of whether they should be given the vote."

Given that actual citizenship is a FURTHER step, to which Aquinas applied rules, I don't believe the article about the precepts on foreigners is fittingly used to dictate against accepting refugees."

My friend replied that he wasn't sure "citizen" meant having the vote. However, in Article 1 of that Question:

"For this is the best form of polity, being partly kingdom, since there is one at the head of all; partly aristocracy, in so far as a number of persons are set in authority; partly democracy, i.e. government by the people, in so far as the rulers can be chosen from the people, and the people have the right to choose their rulers.

Such was the form of government established by the Divine Law."

The minimal participation in the polis as a member united to it in order to the common good, as opposed to one who is only accidentally present, is a citizen, and for Aquinas that includes representation in your own name, not from the patronage of another. Refugees do not have this - they have a visa, not amnesty, and do not have the vote. Moreover, in Article 2:

"As Augustine says (De Civ. Dei ii, 21), quoting Tully, 'a nation is a body of men united together by consent to the law and by community of welfare.' Consequently it is of the essence of a nation that the mutual relations of the citizens be ordered by just laws."

Now, there are laws which, under the Roman law Aquinas saw as the paradigm, and which canon law uses, affecting only citizens. These generally include the right to decide in governmental matters. Again, refugees do not have the vote.

Finally, that article explicitly refers to foreigners. The quote you provide is about foreigners being, as we put it, naturalized, so they are no longer "foreign." This is the process of obtaining citizenship, not asylum, which is what we offer refugees.

 

 

[Anomaly]

I think it would be much more beneficial for the refugees if protestors and adversaries were to move off from battling the right for the Government to vet refugees and immigrants and instead fight for resources for vetting, aid, relocation if necessary.  

The situation in Syria also brings up interesting questions about US Military Power. Given that Russia and other countries involved themselves and are causing and contributing to many of the atrocities, what role should or could the US play?  

[4588686]

On 2/1/2017 at 9:53 AM, Anomaly said:

   If a proper and efficient process was established, more refugees can be brought in and welcomed with confidence and little fear by American society.

We already have a cautious and effective process. People like Socrates and KoC  just don't want a bunch of Arab Muslims being relocated here. 

On 2/1/2017 at 7:04 AM, Papist said:

 

SRSLY!?!

Are you 12?

[Papist]

11 hours ago, Hasan said:

 

Are you 12?

If that helps you.

[4588686]

8 hours ago, Papist said:

If that helps you.

that doesn't make any sense