What Does Saint
Thomas Say About Immigration?
In looking at the debate over
immigration, it is almost automatically assumed that the Church’s position is
one of unconditional charity toward those who enter the nation, legally or
illegally.
However,
is this the case? What does the Bible say about immigration? What do Church
doctors and theologians say? Above all, what does the greatest of doctors,
Saint Thomas Aquinas, say about immigration? Does his opinion offer some
insights to the burning issues now shaking the nation and blurring the national
borders?
Immigration is a modern problem and so some
might think that the medieval Saint Thomas would have no opinion about the
problem. And yet, he does. One has only to look in his masterpiece, the Summa Theologica, in the first part
of the second part, question 105, article 3 (I-II, Q. 105, Art. 3). There one
finds his analysis based on biblical insights that can add to the national
debate. They are entirely applicable to the present.
Saint Thomas: “Man’s
relations with foreigners are twofold: peaceful, and hostile: and in directing
both kinds of relation the Law contained suitable precepts.”
Commentary: In
making this affirmation, Saint Thomas affirms that not all immigrants are
equal. Every nation has the right to decide which immigrants are beneficial,
that is, “peaceful,” to the common good. As a matter of self-defense, the State
can reject those criminal elements, traitors, enemies and others who it deems
harmful or “hostile” to its citizens.
The
second thing he affirms is that the manner of dealing with immigration is
determined by law in the cases of both beneficial and “hostile” immigration.
The State has the right and duty to apply its law.
Saint Thomas: “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].’”
Commentary: Here
Saint Thomas acknowledges the fact that others will want to come to visit or
even stay in the land for some time. Such foreigners deserved to be treated
with charity, respect and courtesy, which is due to any human of good will. In
these cases, the law can and should protect foreigners from being badly treated
or molested.
Saint Thomas: “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).”
Commentary: Saint
Thomas recognizes that there will be those who will want to stay and become
citizens of the lands they visit. However, he sets as the first condition for
acceptance a desire to integrate fully into what would today be considered the
culture and life of the nation.
A
second condition is that the granting of citizenship would not be immediate.
The integration process takes time. People need to adapt themselves to the
nation. He quotes the philosopher Aristotle as saying this process was once
deemed to take two or three generations. Saint Thomas himself does not give a
time frame for this integration, but he does admit that it can take a long
time.
Saint Thomas: “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.”
Commentary: The
common sense of Saint Thomas is certainly not politically correct but it is
logical. The theologian notes that living in a nation is a complex thing. It
takes time to know the issues affecting the nation. Those familiar with the
long history of their nation are in the best position to make the long-term
decisions about its future. It is harmful and unjust to put the future of a
place in the hands of those recently arrived, who, although through no fault of
their own, have little idea of what is happening or has happened in the nation.
Such a policy could lead to the destruction of the nation.
As
an illustration of this point, Saint Thomas later notes that the Jewish people
did not treat all nations equally since those nations closer to them were more
quickly integrated into the population than those who were not as close. Some
hostile peoples were not to be admitted at all into full fellowship due to
their enmity toward the Jewish people.
Saint Thomas: “Nevertheless
it was possible by dispensation for a man to be admitted to citizenship on
account of some act of virtue: thus it is related (Judith 14:6) that Achior,
the captain of the children of Ammon, ‘was joined to the people of Israel, with
all the succession of his kindred.’”
Commentary: That
is to say, the rules were not rigid. There were exceptions that were granted
based on the circumstances. However, such exceptions were not arbitrary but
always had in mind the common good. The example of Achior describes the
citizenship bestowed upon the captain and his children for the good services
rendered to the nation.
* * *
These
are some of the thoughts of Saint Thomas Aquinas on the matter of immigration
based on biblical principles. It is clear that immigration must have two things
in mind: the first is the nation’s unity; and the second is the common good.
Immigration
should have as its goal integration, not disintegration or segregation. The
immigrant should not only desire to assume the benefits but the
responsibilities of joining into the full fellowship of the nation. By becoming
a citizen, a person becomes part of a broad family over the long term and not a
shareholder in a joint stock company seeking only short-term self-interest.
Secondly,
Saint Thomas teaches that immigration must have in mind the common good; it
cannot destroy or overwhelm a nation.
This
explains why so many Americans experience uneasiness caused by massive and
disproportional immigration. Such policy artificially introduces a situation
that destroys common points of unity and overwhelms the ability of a society to
absorb new elements organically into a unified culture. The common good is no
longer considered.
A proportional immigration has
always been a healthy development in a society since in injects new life
qualities into a social body. But when it loses that proportion and undermines
the purpose of the State, it threatens the well-being of the nation.
When
this happens, the nation would do well to follow the advice of Saint Thomas
Aquinas and biblical principles. The nation must practice justice and charity
towards all, including foreigners, but it must above all safeguard the common
good and its unity, without which no country can long endure.
(This posting is a development of a paragraph and footnote from the book, Return to Order. Those who want to post or publish this article can do so as long as the credit is given to the Return to Order website and a link is made.)
No comments:
Post a Comment