Plumillas and tertulianos, proving el blessdesempolvaban his memories of the religious classes of their monjas College to catechize the Spanish population in this regard. Bible verses, appeals to Pauline universalism, and references to the Church’s social doctrine are expressed as topical arguments for his royal decree.
By accepting the invitation, we would like to take the topic seriously and try to draw attention to what happened in its context.
The stranger to whom the files are referred is a vulnerable person who appears by chance and requires our help. Embracing the stranger and the pilgrim is a requirement of love for one’s neighbor and is part of the much-studied demystification of the mechanisms of atonement in the Bible. Girard.
no embargo, the phenomenon we are experiencing is not comparable to any case that appears in the Bible. is Abraham Instead of looking for three visitors in the Mambré villages, he would see a group of lovers willing to settle in his house, so he would never stop to look at his feet.
This is not a question that can be resolved by a subjective act of understanding, not even as a political problem.
As I said Julien FreundPolitics is fundamentally a problem of intensity. There were moments in Spain’s history when immigration was not a political issue and was discussed in the sphere of conscience: in a process without distinction.
But today we are not in this case.
The Social Doctrine of the Church presents a series of guidelines within the principles, but it in no way pretends to be a political program applicable in any context. It is not a substitute for the exercise of prudence, nor does it pretend to be exercised on the margins of historical considerations.
The phenomenon of migration experienced by European societies cannot be dismissed as a prerequisite for routine hospitalization unless you are able to observe its radical exceptionality.
If you want to draw historical comparisons, even in exemplary cases from the Bible, you will have to recall the episodes of great demographic changes that we encounter in the Indo-European migrations, in the Germanic movements at the end of the Roman Empire, or in the forced displacement of parts of India.
By omitting this exception, you can do nothing about moral care. Moreover, anyone who speaks honestly to the papal magisterium will realize that what is being claimed is a synthesis that realizes the alien’s human dignity and responsible care according to the possibilities of the receiving state.
“The phenomenon of migration experienced by European societies cannot be rejected as a prerequisite for normal hospitalization unless you are able to observe radical exceptionalism.”
Thus, it states that care must be “generous and responsible, compatible with the good of its community” (Brothers all, 129) and subject to “bien común” and “diversas juridical conditions” (catechism, 2241).
We see that this regularization of an estimated 840,000 people (who will be much more affected by family restructuring and the subsequent occupational effect) was not accompanied by an expansion of the country’s infrastructure or a new level of demand for jobs. not an increase in food supply.
Applauding this measure at a time of uncertain infrastructure, wages, purchasing power, livelihoods, health benefits and security irresponsibly instrumentalizes the church’s social teaching.
What will be the limit of charity? Will we go back to regularization in a year or two when the illegal immigration bag starts to fill up? Why not?
These questions are relevant and should be taken into account in the communication of the bishops’ conference.
With this communication, the morality of the church appears as what it is not, as one of them luxury belief or “creencias de lujo”. As an opinion that gains moral prestige without having to bear the consequences that follow from it.
Christian morality, like all high-level moralities, is articulated around the other. It is a challenge for all people, but it is actualized in the next, in the reality that we seek and must relate to.
It is not lost in the narrow horizons of abstraction until it materializes in a concrete call. There is no widespread solidarity with humanity until I love the one I care about. That’s why it’s much more challenging.
“I would never feel like a country that would meet all of Earth’s needs, any more than a father of a family would welcome people to meet them in his childhood homes.”
Como señalaba Chesterton“The Bible tells us to love our elders and also our enemies; probably because they are usually the same people.” It’s easy to get lost in philosophical thoughts, but it’s hard to deal with everyday annoyances.
You are not responsible for solving all the world’s problems, even something much more difficult: you are your own guardian. It is a supernatural proposition, but it is built naturally.
I did not tend to feel like a country that would meet all the needs of the country, just as I did not tend to find a father of a family that would welcome people to place them in his children’s homes.
Charity is not irrational or suicidal. You may subvert human logic at times, but always give your own body, not people’s money, people’s neighborhoods, or people’s employees.
It is important to fight for dignity and against the employment of immigrants. However, this cannot lead us to an emotionalism that abstracts us from the structural problems of our homeland or from the historical moment in which we live.
And when the church’s social teaching is used as a low stake to claim that this is not a dirty political maneuver, it distorts and causes scandal.
*** Javier Crevillen is the Derecha Professor of Philosophy and Humanities.
Leave a Reply