Catholic Bishop: An Unregulated Border Is “Morally Very Dangerous”

In recent decades, religious organizations in America have become synonymous with pro-(im)migration positions. Quite notably, Pope Leo XIV has criticized the Trump administration’s enforcement of our immigration law. But one Catholic bishop says, essentially, not so fast.

Bishop Robert Barron of the Diocese of Winona-Rochester, Minnesota, made his comments in a wide-ranging interview with commentator Bill O’Reilly. Barron, who earlier this year inveighed against socialism, struck a diplomatic note. While mentioning the humaneness imperative, he also emphasized government’s “right to maintain its borders [and] to enforce its immigration laws.” The prelate further warned “that an unregulated border is a morally very dangerous proposition.”

O’Reilly opened the segment, which premiered August 15, mentioning that the bishop had himself recently interviewed Vice President JD Vance. Noting that the pair had discussed (im)migration, the commentator pointed out that the phenomenon was causing widespread “death and destruction.” After then asking Barron if he and Vance addressed that reality, the bishop responded, in part:

Catholic social teaching says a government has a right to maintain its borders to enforce its immigration laws. It has to do it humanely, of course, but those two things are in a healthy tension with each other.

What I said to Vance was, you know, my job as a churchman is to articulate the principles. Your job, especially as a Catholic politician, is to formulate the policy. Don’t turn to me to say, “Now, what exactly should we do with this piece of immigration legislation?” I don’t have the detailed knowledge on the ground. That’s for people like you.

Barron then stated that while compassion matters, a country can and must defend its border because of

the chaos caused by an open border — and I mean the moral chaos. Just [consider] the issue of child sex trafficking, which is staggering. And the more we read about that and more that becomes clear to us, the more we see that an unregulated border is a morally very dangerous proposition.

So, I don’t hold to that simple-minded view that, yes, welcome the stranger, therefore no immigration laws, therefore no regulated border. No, no, no, Catholic social teaching is nuanced on that point.

The bishop’s O’Reilly interview is below.

An American Thing, Though Not Like Apple Pie

Barron will seem to many like an anomaly. In reality, though, his position isn’t unusual among prelates — beyond the West, that is. In fact, some foreign churchmen almost make him look like an immigrationist.

Just consider Hungarian bishop László Kiss-Rigó, who addressed mass Muslim migration into Europe in 2015. He actually pushed back on then-pope Francis’ claim that Catholics had a moral duty to help the migrants.

As Christianity Today reported at the time:

“They’re not refugees. This is an invasion,” said Kiss-Rigó. “They come here with cries of ‘Allahu Akbar.’ They want to take over.” Europe is being overwhelmed by non-believers posing as refugees who pose a serious threat to the continent’s “Christian, universal values,” he said.

… “I’m in total agreement with the prime minister [Viktor Orbán],” Kiss-Rigo said….

The bishop said that many of the so-called refugees do not deserve assistance because they “have money.”

… Kiss-Rigó said Pope Francis is greatly misinformed about what is really happening. He “doesn’t know the situation,” he said.

Equally passionate was Italy’s Archbishop Carlo Liberati, Prelate Emeritus of Pompei. “In 10 years we will all be Muslims because of our stupidity,” he lamented in 2017.

Not to be outdone was Cardinal Robert Sarah, a top African prelate. In 2019, he branded mass migration, Fox News related, as

a “new form of slavery” and said those who seek to use the Bible to promote migration are pushing a “false” interpretation of the scriptures.

“It is a false exegesis to use the Word of God to promote migration. God never wanted these rifts.”

Sarah further warned about how Europeans were undergoing demographic genocide. As Fox also informed:

All migrants who arrive in Europe are penniless, without work, without dignity…. This is what the Church wants?” he asked. “The Church can not cooperate with this new form of slavery that has become mass migration. If the West continues in this fatal way, there is a great risk that, due to a lack of birth, it will disappear, invaded by foreigners, just as Rome has been invaded by barbarians.”

Sarah added: “My country [Guinea] is predominantly Muslim. I think I know what reality I’m talking about.”

Going beyond Catholicism, anti-immigrationist sentiments also came from a perhaps surprising religious figure: the Dalai Lama. “Europe is for Europeans” and migrants ultimately “should be returned to their homelands,” he said in 2019. He also warned that Europe could become “Muslim or African” if they aren’t repatriated.

What Does Morality Truly Dictate?

None of this is surprising, as imprudent (im)migration’s negative effects are all around us. Just this weekend, for instance, a pastor in Dearborn, Michigan, warned that his city is now “under Sharia law.” He was referencing the effects of the municipality being majority Muslim, or close to it. This is, mind you, why some call it “Dearbornistan.”

This brings us to the next point. People of faith rightly discuss morality vis-à-vis migration, but we should note that it’s no simple matter. For example, when pondering whether to accept given newcomers, some may ask: “Do they need help?” Or, “What skills do they bring?” or “Will it benefit us economically?” Yet this misses much.

We certainly wouldn’t do this with our family home, after all. We wouldn’t decide to accept a newcomer simply because, let’s say, he’d contribute another $800 monthly to the family budget. Rather, we’d also want to know how his presence would affect our home socially. Would, for instance, he be a good influence on our kids?

Is it any different with our national family? If we understand that the West has been the civilizational light of the world, isn’t preserving it obligatory? And since demographics is destiny, doesn’t this preservation involve maintaining the West’s demographic integrity?

Put simply, what would America be if most of our country looked like Dearborn? Its already-diminished Western character would be no more.

Immigrationism — the belief that immigration is always good, always necessary, must never be questioned, and must be the one constant in an ever-changing universe of policy — is dogma today. But is it true?

As a Catholic figure on the Eternal Word Television Network put it years ago, perhaps there’s a reason God “put oceans between people.”