For the Love of the
Migrants: The
Church’s Ministerial Response to the
Migration
Phenomenon
By
Archie
R. Magarao
8
October 2010
“Seeds migrate on the wings of the winds, plants
migrate from continent to continent brought by the currents of the sea, birds
and beasts migrate, and in the same way and most of all, people migrate either
in groups or individually, always as instruments of the divine providence that
watches over and guides human destinies, even though calamity, toward their
end, which is the perfection of man on earth and the glory of God in heaven.
Such is the lesson that divine revelation and modern history and biology teach
us!”
Blessed John
Baptist Scalabrini
(L’Emigrazione
degli Operai Italiani, Ferrara 1899)
Introduction
The love of Christ towards
migrants urges us (cf. 2 Co 5:14) to look afresh at their problems,
which are to be met with today all over the world. In fact nearly all countries
are now faced with the eruption of the migration phenomenon in one aspect or
another; it affects their social, economic, political and religious life and is
becoming more and more a permanent structural phenomenon. Migration is often
determined by a free decision of the migrants themselves, taken fairly
frequently not only for economic reasons but also for cultural, technical or
scientific motives. As such it is for the most part a clear indication of
social, economic and demographic imbalance on a regional or world-wide level,
which drives people to emigrate.[1]
“Today’s migration makes up the
vastest movement of people of all times. In these last decades, the phenomenon,
now involving about two hundred million individuals, has turned into a structural
reality of contemporary society. It is becoming an increasingly complex problem
from the social, cultural, political, religious, economic and pastoral points
of view,”[2]
says the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People.
The statement reveals the complex reality of migration. Besides, there had been
different solutions and resolutions for migration. However, up until now the
reality of its complexities and problems remain much wider than the provided
solutions. On the other hand, the Catholic Church is addressing the phenomenon
by providing the specific pastoral care for the people on the move.
The paper aims
to draw a general connection between
the Church’s ministry and the pastoral care with and of the migrants. In this
connection, the paper is divided systematically in two segments: the biblical
grounding and the migration ministry. The biblical
grounding part will provide the biblical highlights vis-à-vis migration. Consequently,
the migration ministry part will highlight
some Church teachings relating to migration and it will draw the implication(s)
of the Church’s teachings on migration to the pastoral care of and with
migrants.
1.1 “I was a
stranger and you welcomed me…”
(Mt 25:35): The Biblical Grounding
1.1.1 Migration in the Scriptures: God Demands Hospitality
1.1.1.1 In the Old Testament
Migration
phenomenon is pervasive in the biblical tradition. The entire history of faith
is highlighted by migration experiences. Accordingly, we find the primary
migration experience in the expulsion of Adam and Eve from the Garden of Eden
(Gen. 3:24). Nevertheless, the “displacement to the land of hard work and sweat
is to be understood as both divine punishment and a path to purification, where
the final destination is the lost homeland.”[3]
Then, we witness another migration in the narrative of Cain and Abel. Being
found guilty of committing fratricide, Cain was punished by God through exile
and loneliness in an inhospitable land (Gen 4:10-16). It is worth noting that
To Cain, exile
meant the loss of his personal identity, depriving him of the frame of
reference that is necessary for self-identification: family; friends; the
society, which he was a part of; and the Lord, whose love generated the feeling
of envy for his brother. Condemned to be a ceaseless wanderer, Cain was somehow
denied recovery of his lost identity even in a new environment. Lonely and
unprotected, Cain was exposed to the threats of an unknown world and feared for
his life.[4]
However, the
narratives of migration did not stop here. It was followed by the story of the
Tower of Babel where like the other two stories are depictions of forced
migration. By challenging God, the “punishment for their sin of pride (italicization is mine) was the confusion of languages
and the people’s dispersal throughout the earth.”[5] Again, it became the venue of
purification to recover what has been lost.[6]
These migratory events are further followed by great migration narratives of
the patriarchs. Abraham from the land of Ur to the Promised Land (Gen 12),
Joseph and his brothers in Egypt (Gen 42, 43, 46-47), Moses’ renowned exodus
with the people of Israel (Exodus 12-14), and many others. Both of the forced
and voluntary migrations found in the Scriptures are experiences of being an
“alien” or “foreigner”. In this relation, Abraham is the first symbol of a
foreigner in the Old Testament as his vocation made him to be so.[7]
Moreover, relevant to our discussion in migration is the familiar issue of
being a foreigner. Now, allow me
first to discuss the Old Testament categorization of the “foreigner.” The Jews
used to indicate as “foreigner” [gentile] all the rest of humankind.[8]
Hence, we find in the Hebrew Scriptures “four different words constituting the
semantic field of the ‘foreigner:’ zar, nokri,
toshabh and gher.”[9]
However, these words are dependent on the realities of the foreigner’s
relationship to the people of Israel.[10]
Zar means the alien to be feared:
This term is
used 81 times to refer to one who is a foreigner or an outsider vis-à-vis one’s
family, or people, or political system, or religious belief… The word zar often appears in connection with
enemy aliens or a foreign race, with no rights whatsoever in Israel. Even justice
was denied to the zar. The zar was considered as the main culprit
behind the disasters that befell Israel. According to prophetic tradition,
unfaithfulness to the covenant with God led to a dramatic encounter with the zar….
…Zar is also used to indicate the
stranger within one’s family (Deut 25:5), or the stranger in the sense of not
being part of a community or a people (Is 1:7; 61:5), or the “barbarian” in
relation to the political establishment (Ez 7:21). Finally, zar may refer to laypeople who were
excluded in religious ceremonies, where only the priests participated. [11]
Nokri
means the alien to be avoided:
The word nokri (ben nekhar), employed 19 times… covers everything of alien or
foreign character, regardless of the place of residence; rather, it is defined
by the context I which it appears. It referred to the Canaanites, the Moabites
and the Ammonites. These nokri were
strictly taboo, with no rights or privileges in the Israel community. Their
status was that of a bastard, in Hebrew, a mamser,
meaning one of mixed or spurious origins, being specifically prevented by
Divine Decree from entering the congregation of the Lord even to his tenth
generation….
…The nokri is kept at a certain distance,
because of his/her transitory condition…notwithstanding this apparent fear and
distance of nokri, in the end the golden
rule of hospitality and politeness prevails over all other rules…[12]
Toshabh
means the alien to be hosted:
The Hebrew word toshabh is used to identify an alien or
estranged person who is accepted in Jewish society, but with limited rights. It
depicts the condition of a non-permanent sojourner, akin to resident guest,
such as a visitor in the house of an Israelite. The toshabh may not, under any circumstances, eat the Passover or any
of the “holy” things of a priest. His/her children could be bought as perpetual
slaves with absolutely no possibility of redemption; the Law of Jubilee did not
apply to them. The toshabh, while
permitted to reside in Israel, had no legal status, except with respect to justice, beyond which he or she had no
rights whatsoever.[13]
Gher
means the alien to be respected:
A temporary
inhabitant or newcomer racially identical with Israel but lacking inherited
rights was called the gher; however,
the gher was given rights. The term
was used to refer to the Patriarchs in Palestine, the Israelites in Egypt, the
Levites dwelling among the Israelites, and particularly the free aliens
residing among the Israelites… According to the rules of nationality, the
freeman followed his father, so that the son of a gher and an Israelite woman was also a gher. Special care was to be taken to give the legal protection to
the gher. According to the law, the gherim were to have equality of justice
with the native Israelites. Because the gherim
were naturally disadvantaged on account of their alienness, they became one
of the “weak and helpless,” who should be given specific protection before the
law. Thus provision is made for them to participate in tithes. They were
expected to keep the law, and nearly all the main holy days applied to the gherim; they were to rest on the Sabbath
and to rejoice on some religious feasts. They were forbidden to eat the
Passover unless they were circumcised, and were then subject to the rules of
purification against uncleanliness like any Israelite. The status and privileges
of the gherim derive from the bond of
hospitality in which a guest is inviolable, with claims of protection and full
sustenance in return for loyalty. From the vision granted to the prophet
Ezekiel, we see the gherim being
granted an inheritance in the land among the Israelites.[14]
One observes that from the four
categorization of the foreigner there is a noticeable movement. That is, the
perception of the foreigner from being a zar
to gher. In other words, it is a movement
from hostility to hospitality; from fear to respect. We expect the same development
when it comes to the treatment of the migrants in foreign lands.
1.1.1.2 In the New Testament
Now, let us
delve briefly into the New Testament’s perception of the foreigner. There are
several terminologies to indicate the foreigner in the New Testament but to
highlight a few we have these categories: xenos,
barbaro, paroikos, and allotrios/alloghenes.
Xenos
possess two different meanings: foreigner,
which prevails in the New Testament, and guest/host.[15]
Jesus identifies himself with the foreigner/stranger waiting to be welcomed:[16]
“…I was… a stranger and you welcomed me.”(Mt.
25:35). Moreover, in the letter to the Ephesians 2:17-19, we find that
foreigners who were understood as people who were not part of the alliance are
now an integral part of the new Christian community.[17]
Barbaro
as a word is of Greek origin. This terminology is attached to those (foreigner)
who do not speak Greek e.g. Egyptians, etc.[18]
Paroikos
means a resident foreigner or a pilgrim:
This term is the
one more directly connected with gher
(even though we have to say that in the LXX the usual term used for gher is proselytos); in fact we find it in Stephen’s speech, Acts 7:6: “God
said, the descendants of Abraham will be pilgrims/foreigner in a foreign land,”
and the term applies to Moses in Acts 7:29, he is a “foreign resident [paroikos] in Midian; and in Ephesians
2:19 where the new Christians are not foreigners [xenoi] or strangers [paroikoi]
any longer.” Then in 1 Peter 2:11 all the Christians are paroikoi, this time strangers to the world… Interestingly, the word
is applied to Jesus with the meaning of stranger, pilgrim. “One of them, named
Cleopas, said to him in reply, ‘Are you the only foreigner in Jerusalem who
does not know of the things that have taken place there in these days?’” (Lk
24:18).[19]
Allotrios/Alloghenes
means stranger, different, other:
In Luke 17:18
where Jesus heals ten lepers along the border between Samaria and Galilee and
where, surprisingly, the only one who comes back to thank him is a Samaritan,
whereupon the reaction of Jesus is: “Why is this foreigner [alloghene] the only one who came back to
give thanks to God?” Here a foreigner during a journey is cited as an example
of faith.[20]
It is worth noticing that if the attitude
towards the foreigner in the Old Testament is a movement from fear to respect,
we have in the New Testament a prioritization surpassing that of the Old
Testament, that is, the prioritization of integration.
We find this in the first categorization of the foreigner as xenos which is a common word for
foreigner/stranger in the New Testament.[21] In effect, integration paves the way
for the development of communion among diverse peoples. It is a unified diversity in the name of Christ,
the reason and meaning of all human communions. However, the invitation on how
we can transform hostility towards the migrant into hospitality remains a
compelling question.
1.2 For the Love of
the Migrants: The Migration Ministry
The rise of human mobility urges the
Church to say:
[The] Holy Mother Church,
impelled by her ardent love of souls has striven to fulfill the duties inherent
in her mandate of salvation for all mankind, a mandate entrusted to her by
Christ. She has been especially careful to provide all possible spiritual care
for pilgrims, aliens, exiles and migrants of every kind. This work has been
carried out chiefly by priests who, in administering the Sacraments and
preaching the Word of God, have labored zealously to strengthen the Faith of
the Christians in the bond of charity.[22]
Christ himself
is the exemplar of loving the foreigner. Hence, as Christians, it is inevitable
that we do not only love those who are familiar to us but also those who are
stranger to us. For if we love only those who love us, what credit is it to us?
(Luke 6: 32). Jesus made it clear that authentic charity rests in the
unconditional and indiscriminate love towards all as found in the parable of
the Good Samaritan. In relation to migration, we somehow hear Jesus demanding,
“Love the migrants.” Thus, “the love
of Christ towards migrants urges us (cf. 2Cor 5:14) to look afresh at their
problems, which are to be met with today all over the world.”[23]
Migration
narratives are pervasive in the Scriptures as what was mentioned earlier. The
greatest migration, however, is found in the incarnation of Jesus Christ: the migration of God from heaven to
earth. It was an experience of making room (hospitality) for the Divine to
dwell in our midst. Nevertheless, the migration story did not cease with Christ’s
incarnation but continued during the post-resurrection era when the apostles of
Jesus became itinerant to preach the gospel. Thus, Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi (EMCC) 3 conveys: “the task
entrusted by our Lord to His Church to proclaim the Word of God has been
interwoven from the very beginning with the history of the emigration of
Christians.”[24]
In this case, human mobility is not new to us. Besides, inside or outside the
Biblical world we still hear the compelling reality of migration. Moreover, we,
Christians, escathologically awaits the final migration of all time, that is,
the migration of souls to the bosom of God from this temporal world. Migration
is an all-encompassing reality of the entire human existence.
1.2.1 Recognition
precedes Hospitality
Hospitality is a foreseeable concept
in migration. Hence, no one can talk of migration without simultaneously
talking about hospitality. This would mean that the specific pastoral care to
the people on the move must take note of hospitality.
However, I understood hospitality in the light of recognition. I further argue that recognition effects and precedes hospitality. Hospitality presupposes the fact that the person first recognizes the other as the other not totally different from oneself.
For one has to identify first the object of hospitality before rendering it. It
will be absurd to think of someone rendering hospitality devoid of any idea of
who[25]
the recipient is. One only gives something whether out of hospitality or not
because he/she is certain of the object of such action. Thus, recognition is
the mobilizing factor in materializing hospitality. Moreover, it is a
recognition that declares: “I see my
self in you,” and, “You are not different from me.” Theologically, hospitality denotes
the recognition of God’s face in the
stranger:
In the foreigner
a Christian sees not simply a neighbor, but the face of Christ Himself, who was
born in a manger and fled into Egypt, where he was a foreigner, summing up and
repeating in His own life the basic experience of His people (cf. Mt
2:13ff). Born away from home and coming from another land (cf. Lk
2:4-7), “he came to dwell among us” (cf. Jn 1:11, 14) and spent His
public life on the move, going through towns and villages (cf. Lk 13:22;
Mt 9:35). After His resurrection, still a foreigner and unknown, He
appeared on the way to Emmaus to two of His disciples, who only recognized Him
at the breaking of the bread (cf. Lk 24:35). So Christians are followers
of a man on the move “who has nowhere to lay his head” (Mt 8:20; Lk
9:58)[26]
The
hospitality shown to the migrants is in line with the fact that one recognizes
that “they are ‘…matris Ecclesiae Filii (Children
of the Mother Church),’ and they should be welcomed because of the explicit
commandment in the Holy Scripture: ‘Love the Foreigner, for you were a
foreigner yourself’ and ‘I was a stranger and you welcomed me!’”[27]
In this connection, migrants in their mobility and entry in an alien soil
“share the marginalization of the unemployed, the ill-adjusted youth, and
abandoned women. The migrant thirsts for some gesture that will make him feel
welcome, recognized and acknowledged as a person. Even just a simple greeting
is one of these.”[28]
Furthermore, hospitality or welcoming gives importance to transcending social
differences and breaking social boundaries that exclude certain categories or
kinds of persons.[29]
Hospitality, consequently, integrates respect
and care.[30]
1.2.1.1 Welcoming and Solidarity
Welcoming[31]
the stranger assumes the belief that all are created after the image and
likeness of God (Gen 1: 27). Furthermore, “in offering hospitality to the
stranger we may indeed be entertaining angels” [32](cf.
Heb 13. 2). When it comes to welcoming and solidarity, however, the greatest
responsibility might be found in the receiving Church. Hence, “Christians must
in fact promote an authentic culture of
welcome (cf. EEu 101 and 103)
capable of accepting the truly human values of the immigrants over and above
any difficulties caused by living together with persons who are different (cf. EEu 85, 112 and PaG 65).”[33]
Such fraternal welcome will be in sense a fulfillment of St. Paul’s admonition,
“Welcome one another then, as Christ welcomed you, for the glory of God” (Rm 15: 7).[34]
On the other hand, EMCC admittedly notes
that the appeal of welcoming the migrants does not remove “a widespread fear or
feelings of insecurity in people, neither does it guarantee due respect for
legality nor safeguard the integrity of the host community. But a genuinely
Christian spirit will give the right approach and courage to face these
problems…”[35]
For this reason EMCC urges that
the entire
Church in the host country must feel concerned and engaged regarding
immigrants. This means that the local Churches must rethink pastoral care, programming
it to help the faithful live their faith authentically in today’s new
multicultural and pluri-religious context. With the help of social and pastoral
workers, the local population should made aware of the complex problems of
migration and the need to oppose baseless suspicions and offensive prejudices
against foreigners.[36]
Moreover, in welcoming and
solidarity, one has to demarcate the meaning of assistance, welcome, and
integration. Assistance would mean a first short-term welcome, welcome would
mean longer-term projects and integration would mean an aim to be pursued
constantly over a long period.[37]
Nevertheless,
assistance or “first welcome” is of the greatest importance (let us think, for
example, of migrants’ hospitality centers, especially in transit migrations:
canteens, dormitories, clinics, economic aid, reception centers. But also
important are acts of welcome in its full sense, which aim at the progressive
integration and self-sufficiency of the immigrant. Let us remember in
particular the commitment undertaken for family reunification, education for
children, housing, work, associations, promotion of civil rights and migrants’
various ways of participation in their host society. Religious, social,
charitable and cultural associations of Christian inspiration should also make
efforts to involve immigrants themselves in their structures.[38]
EMCC added that receiving Churches should
give importance to the “incultured liturgies” and “popular pieties,” e.g. the
novena prayer to our Mother of Perpetual Help among Filipino migrants, “in the
pastoral care of migrants, which moreover, should reserve special attention to
the religious differentiations of migrants (Catholics, Christians and
non-Christians).”[39]
In the long run, one observes that given the multicultural reality of migration
interreligious dialogue is
definitively not an option.[40]
…To this end
both the ordinary Catholic faithful and pastoral workers in local Churches
should receive solid formation and information on other religions so as to overcome
prejudices, prevail over religious relativism and avoid unjustified suspicions
and fears that hamper dialogue and erect barriers, even provoking violence or
misunderstanding. Local Churches will take care to include such formation in
the educational programs of their seminaries, schools and parishes.[41]
Furthermore, the
relationship of the sending and receiving Churches must foster the spirit of
communion as to concretize an ecclesiology of communion of communions.[42]
Hence, we are here paving the way to the development of an spirituality of
communion.
A spirituality
of communion implies also the ability to see what is positive in others, to
welcome it and prize it as a gift from God: not only as a gift for the brother
or sister who has received it directly, but also as a "gift for me".
A spirituality of communion means, finally, to know how to "make
room" for our brothers and sisters, bearing "each other's
burdens" (Gal 6:2) and resisting the selfish temptations which
constantly beset us and provoke competition, careerism, distrust and jealousy.[43]
Having both
Churches in communion vis-à-vis migration they are invited to give migration
issues a specific place in the theological and pastoral information of the
clergy and laity in general.[44]
The importance of celebrating annually a Migrant’s Day (or Migrant’s Week) is
necessary with the proposal of establishing a universally agreed date for such
a celebration.[45] EMCC provides the following vision
relating to the pastoral care of the people on the move:
·
The intercultural
and interethnic or interritual parish, providing pastoral assistance for both
the local population and foreigners resident in the same territory. In this
way, the traditional territorial parish would become the privileged and stable
place of interethnic and intercultural experience, while the individual groups
would retain a certain autonomy. Or
·
The local parish
with service for migrants of one or more ethnic groups, of one or more rites. This would be
territorial parish made up of the local population but whose church or parish
center would be a point of reference, meeting and community life for one or
more foreign communities too.
Finally, we
could envisage certain environments, structures or specific pastoral sectors
that are dedicated to animation and formation at various levels in the world of
migrants. We have in mind:
·
Centers for
pastoral work among young persons and for vocational orientation, with the task of
furthering initiatives to this end;
·
Centers for the
formation of the laity and pastoral workers, in a multicultural perspective;
·
Centers for
study and pastoral reflection, with the task of observing the evolution
of the migration phenomenon and presenting suitable pastoral proposals to those
I charge.[46]
Furthermore, the
Christian community in any receiving Churches should be the first to recognize the value of the
migrant(s). For by recognizing the foreigner “communicates that he or she is
interesting and worthwhile; we pay attention to the people we value.”[47]
Moreover, the said Church must overcome xenophobia and the propensity of
alienating the other. Hence, the
receiving Church must serve as the seedbed and actualization of the Gospel imperative of loving the foreigner.
Nonetheless, the sending Church should at the same time communicate with the
receiving Church in assuring the possibility of such recognition.
Just
to highlight a few, the Catholic Church in its pastoral work towards the
migrants included in its canon a specific norm for handling migration as found
in Canon Law 1983 no. 529 that the pastor should be diligent in taking care of
the exiles[48]
and that a chaplaincy must be provided
to the people on the move.[49]
However, one can certainly find more specific details and appropriation of the
Canon Law vis-à-vis migration as one finds it cited in EMCC 24-26.
1.3 Conclusion
We are all
migrants in this temporal world. In other words, we are all pilgrims (paroikoi). As pilgrims, we are
bound to treat others justly in the same way we treat ourselves. For it is only
in recognizing the other as not
distinctly different from me that one overcomes alienation. Attached to this is
the responsibility of oneself towards the other person. Thus, I am a subject as far as I am responsible of
the other. Furthermore, responsibility is the fundamental structure of
subjectivity.[50] The
mere presence of the other e.g. the migrant(s) already demands responsibility from the other. Migration
should prioritize this fundamental value: my being-for-the-other precedes my being-to-oneself.
In other words, my responsibility towards the migrant(s) takes priority over my
self. We, as Christian are urged to
love and respond to the migrants as Christ did. It is only in loving the other as ourselves that we achieve the
perfection of Christian charity. As long as God equalizes men in loving them
equally, humanity will always be bound to love
one another.
The fact that
migrants exist recognizing them will
remain a moral obligation. To be human is
to recognize the other. Needless
to say, humanity spells recognition as
it consequently spells hospitality. Such
is the power of recognition that it
does not excuse anyone. “We do not exist as selves without the presence of
others, without the web of relationships within which every ‘I’ emerges.”[51]
Besides, recognition vis-à-vis hospitality certainly ends up in establishing relationship(s). As relationship,
recognition connotes an obligation to
understand the other e.g. the migrant(s).[52]
In other words, the receiving Church and the nationals should understand the
person of the immigrant i.e. culture, ethnicity, etc. The primary
responsibility should be found in the receiving Church though the sending
Church should reciprocally oblige itself in bearing constant communication with
the receiving Church in assuring the good condition of the migrant(s). In
addition, Benedict XVI said, “Their native Churches will demonstrate their
concern by sending pastoral agents of the same language and culture, in a
dialogue of charity with the particular Churches that welcome them.”[53]
In this relation, pastorally we note:
Emigrants, on
account of the peculiar nature of the Church, are not outsiders. The very fact
that they are to be found in a given area of the Pilgrim Church of God means
they cannot but receive from her the instruments and benefits of salvation. The local Church where they arrive is
therefore where the principal onus of pastoral responsibility for immigrants
falls…[54]
(Italicization is mine)
The recognition
that we are all children of the same God will always pose the command to
recognize the foreigner and welcome them. The Scriptural command of loving one’s neighbor is not exclusive
but inclusive. Such is the perfection
of Christian morality and charity. As the reflection aims at overcoming the
rampant alienation and discrimination in the world of migration, the Church
envisions a communion of communions.
This is a communion of diversity that characterizes its universality where
migrants are treated as brethrens not aliens. As what Lumen Gentium reminds us:
All human beings
are called to be part of this catholic unity of the people of God which in
promoting universal peace presages it. And there belong to or are related to it
in various ways, the Catholic faithful, all who believe in Christ, and indeed
the whole of mankind, for all men are called by the grace of God to salvation.[55]
Works Cited
Baggio,
Fabio. “Theology of Migration.” In Exodus
Series Exodus Series 3: A Resource Guide for the Migrant Ministry in Asia. Quezon City: Scalabrini Migration
Center, 2005.
Benedict
XVI, Message for the 92nd World Day of Migrants and Refugees, Migrations: a Sign of Times. Vatican, 18 October 2006.
John Paul II, Apostolic Letter, Novo Millennio Ineunte. Vatican,
6 January 2001.
Levinas,
Emmanuel. Ethics and Infinity. Trans.
Richard A. Cohen. Quezon City: Claretian Publication, 2001.
Magarao,
Archie R. “The Hermeneutical Understanding: A Hans-Georg Gadamer Solution to
the Problem of Interpretation.” A. B. Philosophy Thesis, Christ the King
Mission Seminary, 2010.
Pettena,
Maurizio. “The Teaching of the Church on Migration.” In Exodus Series 4: A Resource Guide for the Migrant Ministry in Asia. Quezon
City: Scalabrini Migration Center, 2005.
Pius
XII, Apostolic Constitution, Exsul
Familia Nazarethana. Rome: Castel Gandolfo, 1 August 1952.
Pohl,
Christine. “Hospitality, Dignity, and the Power of Recognition.” In Making Room: Rediscovering Hospitality as a
Christian Tradition. 61-83. Cambridge, U. K.: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1999.
Pontifical
Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, Instruction Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi (1 May
2004).
Schreiter,
Robert. “Theology’s Contribution to (Im)Migration.” In Migration, Religious Experience, and Globalization, eds. Gioacchino
Campese and Pietro Ciallella, 170-180. New York: Center for Migration Studies,
2003.
Second
Vatican Council. Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium, (21 November 1964).
The Code of the
Canon Law in English Translation (28 January 1983).
Veling,
Terry A. Living in the Margins:
Intentional Communities and the Art of Interpretation. New York: A
Crossroad Herder Book, 1995.
Zevola,
Goivanni. “What are you talking about to each other as you walk along? (Lk
24:17): Migration in the Bible and Our Journey of Faith.” In Faith on the Move: Toward a Theology of
Migration in Asia, 93-117. Quezon
City: Ateneo de Manila University Press, 2008.
[1] Pontifical Council for the
Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi (1 May 2004), 1. This document is the
latest instruction for the pastoral ministry with the migrants of the Holy See.
Thus, it sheds a great light in addressing the ministerial work of the Catholic
Church towards the people on the move.
[2] Ibid., presentation
[3] Fabio Baggio, “Theology of Migration,”
in Exodus Series 3: A Resource Guide for
the Migrant Ministry in Asia (Quezon City: Scalabrini Migration Center,
2005), 3.
[4] Ibid., 4.
[5] Ibid., 5.
[6] Ibid.
[7] See Giovanni Zevola, “’What are
you talking about to each other as you walk along?’ (Lk 24:17): Migration in
the Bible and Our Journey of Faith,” in Faith
on the Move: Toward a Theology of Migration in Asia (Quezon City: Ateneo de
Manila Press, 2008), 94.
[8] Maurizio Pettena, “Migration in
the Bible,” in Exodus Series 2: A
Resource Guide for the Migrant Ministry in Asia (Quezon City: Scalabrini
Migration Center, 2005), 3.
[9] Ibid.
[10] Ibid.
[11] Ibid., 4.
[12] Ibid., 4-5.
[13] Ibid., 5-6.
[14] Ibid., 6-7.
[15] Zevola, “’What are you talking
about to each other as you walk along?’ (Lk 24:17): Migration in the Bible and
Our Journey of Faith,” 111.
[16] Ibid.
[17] Ibid.
[18] See for further explanation and
exposition ibid., 111-112.
[19] Ibid., 112.
[20] Ibid., 112.
[21] Cf. Maurizio Pettena, “Migration
in the Bible,” 13.
[22] Apostolic Constitution of Pius
XII, Exsul Familia Nazarethana (1
August 1952), I.
[23] Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, 12.
[24] Ibid., 14.
[25] I made use of the pronoun “who”
to designate the object of hospitality with the assumption that hospitality
vis-à-vis human migration is always given to human person(s).
[26] Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, 15.
[27] Maurizio Pettena, “Migration in
the Bible,” 3.
[28] Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, 96.
[29] Christine Pohl, “Hospitality,
Dignity, and the Power of Recognition,” in Making
Room: Recovering Hospitality as a Christian Tradition (Cambridge, U.
K.: William B. Eerdmans Publishing
Company, 1999), 62.
[30] Ibid., 69.
[31] I consider “welcoming” as a
consequential effect of recognizing the
presence of the other and more
specifically the migrants. Welcoming or hospitality, logically, presupposes recognition.
It is because the object of hospitality has to be primarily recognized or
identified before one renders the act of hospitality. In addition, one has to
recognize first the human dignity of the other
before he/she renders hospitality to him/her. For without recognition, hospitality is impossible. Finally, recognition
denotes that one recognizes the face of God in the other person.
[32] Robert Schreiter, “Theology’s
Contribution to (Im)Migration,” in Migration,
Religious Experience, and Globalization, eds. Gioacchino Campese and Pietro
Ciallella (New York: Center for Migration Studies, 2003), 175.
[33] Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, 39.
[34] Cf. Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, 40.
[35] Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, 40.
[36] Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, 41.
[37] See Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, 42.
[38] Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, 43.
[39] Maurizio Pettena, “The Teaching
of the Church on Migration,” 11.
[40] Ibid.
[41] Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, 69.
[42] See Second Vatican Council,
Dogmatic Constitution on the Church, Lumen
Gentium, 13.
[43] John Paul II, Apostolic Letter, Novo Millennio Ineunte, 43.
[44] Maurizio Pettena, “The Teaching
of the Church on Migration,” 12.
[45] Ibid.
[46] Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi, 93-94.
[47] Pohl, “Hospitality, Dignity, and
the Power of Recognition, 71.
[48] The Code of the Canon Law in
English Translation no. 529 (28 January 1983).
[49] Ibid., no. 568.
[50] Emmanuel Levinas, Ethics and Infinity, trans. Richard A.
Cohen (Quezon City: Claretian Publication, 2001), 95.
[51] Terry A. Veling, Living in the Margins: Intentional
Communities and the Art of Interpretation (New York: A Crossroad Herder
Book, 1995), 65.
[52] Archie R. Magarao, “The
Hermeneutical Understanding: A Hans-Georg Gadamer Solution to the Problem of
Interpretation” (A. B. Philosophy Thesis, Christ the King Mission Seminary,
2010), 46.
[53] See Benedict XVI, Message for
the 92nd World Day of Migrants and Refugees (2006), Migrations: a Sign of Times, 13.
[54] Pontifical Commission for the
Pastoral Care of Migrants and Itinerant People, Church and Human Mobility, 23 as quoted in the work of Maurizio
Pettena, “The Teaching of the Church on Migration,” in Exodus Series 4: A Resource Guide for the Migrant Ministry in Asia
(Quezon City: Scalabrini Migration Center, 2005).
[55] Second Vatican Council, Dogmatic
Constitution on the Church, Lumen Gentium,
13. As cited in the work of Fabio Baggio, “Theology of Migration,” in Exodus Series 3: A Resource Guide for the
Migrant Ministry in Asia (Quezon City: Scalabrini Migration Center, 2005),
26-27.
.jpg)
Mga Komento
Mag-post ng isang Komento