Washington D.C., Jan 22, 2019 / 03:58 pm (CNA).- While chanting and playing ceremonial drums, a group of Native American rights activists reportedly led by Nathan Phillips attempted Jan. 19 to enter Washington, D.C.’s Basilica of the National Shrine of the Immaculate Conception during a Saturday evening Mass.
The group of 20 demonstrators was stopped by shrine security as it tried to enter the church during its 5:15 pm Vigil Mass, according to a shrine security guard on duty during the Mass.
“It was really upsetting,” the guard told CNA.
“There were about twenty people trying to get in, we had to lock the doors and everything.”
The guard said the incident was a disappointment during a busy and joyful weekend for the shrine.
“We had hundreds and hundreds of people from all over the country come here to celebrate life, to celebrate each other together. That a protest tried to come inside during Mass was really the worst.”
The guard told CNA the situation was “tense.”
“I’m just really grateful that nothing too bad happened, they were really angry.”
A source close to the shrine’s leadership corroborated the security guard’s account, telling CNA that during the Mass, Phillips and the group tried to enter the church while playing drums and chanting, and were prohibited from entering the building by security personnel, who locked the main basilica doors with the congregation still inside.
The shrine’s spokeswoman would not confirm or deny that the group attempted to enter the Mass. She told CNA that “a group did assemble on Saturday evening outside the the shrine” and that they “left without incident.”
Philips was the subject of national media attention on Saturday, after video went viral on social media depicting parts of a Jan. 18 incident involving him and several teenagers, some of whom were students from Covington Catholic High School in Kentucky. The incident has become the subject of intense national debate, and Phillips has been accused by some of instigating an encounter with the students, and subsequently altering his initial account of events.
Covington Catholic High School was closed Jan. 22, following threats against students and staff in the wake of media coverage of Friday’s incident.
The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation reported that about 60 people gathered outside the shrine in support of Phillips on Saturday night, though it did not mention reports that Phillips and some supporters attempted to disrupt the evening Mass.
Video footage showed one supporter saying that the group had gathered at the shrine to listen to Phillips, and to hold the Catholic Church “accountable” for the alleged actions of the Covington Catholic students and for the “colonial violence that the Catholic Church reproduces every day.”
A photograph attached to the post shows Phillips addressing the group outside the shrine.
The security guard told CNA that the incident was especially distressing given that Mass was underway.
“It’s a house of worship, a place of prayer where people come to celebrate. All this anger is so against what we are all about here.”
He told CNA that he’d never witnessed anything like it during his whole time of employment at the basilica.
“I don’t know the details of what happened on Friday [after the March for Life], I wish I did. All I know is it’s a shame, and it’s got nothing to do with why people were here.”
“And this all happened on our biggest event of the year. I hope we never see it again.”
If you value the news and views Catholic World Report provides, please consider donating to support our efforts. Your contribution will help us continue to make CWR available to all readers worldwide for free, without a subscription. Thank you for your generosity!
Click here for more information on donating to CWR. Click here to sign up for our newsletter.
Dainelys Soto, Genesis Contreras, and Daniel Soto, who arrived from Venezuela after crossing the U.S. border from Mexico, wait for dinner at a hotel provided by the Annunciation House on Sept. 22, 2022 in El Paso, Texas. / Credit: Joe Raedle/Getty Images
CNA Staff, Sep 9, 2024 / 06:00 am (CNA).
Long a champion of immigrants, particularly those fleeing war-torn countries and impoverished regions, Pope Francis last month delivered some of the clearest words in his papacy yet in support of migrants — and in rebuke of those who turn away from them.
“It must be said clearly: There are those who work systematically and with every means possible to repel migrants,” the pope said during a weekly Angelus address. “And this, when done with awareness and responsibility, is a grave sin.”
“In the time of satellites and drones, there are migrant men, women, and children that no one must see,” the pope said. “They hide them. Only God sees them and hears their cry. This is a cruelty of our civilization.”
The pope has regularly spoken out in favor of immigrants. In June he called on the faithful to “unite in prayer for all those who have had to leave their land in search of dignified living conditions.” The Holy Father has called the protection of migrants a “moral imperative.” He has argued that migrants “[must] be received” and dealt with humanely.
Migrants aboard an inflatable vessel in the Mediterranean Sea approach the guided-missile destroyer USS Carney in 2013. Carney provided food and water to the migrants aboard the vessel before coordinating with a nearby merchant vessel to take them to safety. Credit: Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Europe-Africa/U.S. 6th Fleet, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons
The Catholic Church has long been an advocate and protector of immigrants. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops (USCCB) notes on its website that “a rich body of Church teaching, including papal encyclicals, bishops’ statements, and pastoral letters, has consistently reinforced our moral obligation to treat the stranger as we would treat Christ himself.”
The Catechism of the Catholic Church teaches that prosperous nations “are obliged, to the extent they are able, to welcome the foreigner in search of the security and means of livelihood which he cannot find in his country of origin.”
Popes throughout the years, meanwhile, have expressed sentiments on immigration similar to Francis’. Pope Pius XII in 1952, for instance, described the Holy Family’s flight into Egypt as “the archetype of every refugee family.”
The Church, Pius XII said, “has been especially careful to provide all possible spiritual care for pilgrims, aliens, exiles, and migrants of every kind.”
Meanwhile, “devout associations” throughout the centuries have spearheaded “innumerable hospices and hospitals” in part for immigrants, Pius XII said.
Implications and applications of Church teaching
Chad Pecknold, an associate professor of systematic theology at The Catholic University of America, noted that the catechism “teaches that nations have the right to borders and self-definition, so there is no sense in which Catholic teaching supports the progressive goal of ‘open borders.’”
“There is a ‘duty of care’ which is owed to those fleeing from danger,” he told CNA, “but citizenship is not owed to anyone who can make it across a national border, and illegal entry or asylum cannot be taken as a debt of citizenship.”
Paul Hunker, an immigration attorney who previously served as chief counsel of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Dallas, agreed.
“States have to have responsibility for their own communities, they have to look out for them,” he told CNA. “So immigration can be regulated so as to not harm the common good.”
Still, Hunker noted, Catholic advocates are not wrong in responding to immigration crises — like the ongoing irregular influx through the U.S. southern border — with aid and assistance.
Paul Hunker, an immigration attorney and former chief counsel of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) in Dallas, says Catholic advocates are not wrong in responding to immigration crises — like the ongoing irregular influx through the U.S. southern border — with aid and assistance. Credit: Photo courtesy of Paul Hunker
Many Catholic organizations offer shelter, food, and legal assistance to men, women, and children who cross into the country illegally; such groups have been overwhelmed in recent years with the crush of arriving migrants at the country’s southern border.
“It’s the responsibility of the federal government to take care of the border,” he said. “When the government has created a crisis at the U.S. border, Catholic dioceses are going to want to help people.”
“I completely support what the Catholic organizations are doing in Mexico and the United States to assist people who are there,” Hunker said. “The people responding are not responsible for these crises.”
Latest crisis and legal challenge
Not everyone feels similarly. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton has launched an investigation of multiple Catholic nonprofits that serve illegal immigrants in the state. Paxton alleges that through the services it provides to migrants, El Paso-based Annunciation House has been facilitating illegal immigration and human trafficking.
A lawyer for the group called the allegations “utter nonsense,” though attorney Jerome Wesevich acknowledged that the nonprofit “serves undocumented persons as an expression of the Catholic faith and Jesus’ command to love one another, no exceptions.”
There are considerable numbers of Church teachings that underscore the need for a charitable response to immigrants. In his 1963 encyclical Pacem in Terris, Pope John XXIII argued that man “has the right to freedom of movement and of residence within the confines of his own state,” and further that “when there are just reasons in favor of it, he must be permitted to emigrate to other countries and take up residence there.”
In the encyclical Caritas in Veritate, meanwhile, Pope Benedict XVI in 2009 acknowledged that migration poses “dramatic challenges” for nations but that migrants “cannot be considered as a commodity or a mere workforce.”
“Every migrant is a human person who, as such, possesses fundamental, inalienable rights that must be respected by everyone and in every circumstance,” the late pope wrote.
Edward Feser, a professor of philosophy at Pasadena City College in California, noted that the Church “teaches that nations should be welcoming to immigrants, that they should be sensitive to the hardships that lead them to emigrate, that they ought not to scapegoat them for domestic problems, and so on.”
Catholic teaching does not advocate an ‘open borders’ policy
Yet Catholic teaching does not advocate an “open borders” policy, Feser said. He emphasized that the catechism says countries should accept immigrants “to the extent they are able,” and further that countries “may make the exercise of the right to immigrate subject to various juridical conditions.”
There “is nothing per se in conflict with Catholic teaching when citizens and politicians call on the federal government to enforce its immigration laws,” Feser said. “On the contrary, the catechism backs them up on this.”
In addition, it is “perfectly legitimate,” Feser argued, for governments to consider both economic and cultural concerns when setting immigration policy. It is also “legitimate to deport those who enter a country illegally,” he said.
Still, he acknowledged, a country can issue exceptions to valid immigration laws when the moral situation demands it.
“Of course, there can be individual cases where a nation should forgo its right to deport those who enter it illegally, and cases where the manner in which deportations occur is associated with moral hazards, such as when doing so would break up families or return an immigrant to dangerous conditions back in his home country,” he said.
“Governments should take account of this when formulating and enforcing policy,” he said.
The tension between responding charitably to immigrants and ensuring a secure border was perhaps put most succinctly in 1986 by the late Father Theodore Hesburgh, who served as chairman of the U.S. Select Commission for Immigration and Refugee Policy that was created by the U.S. Congress in the early 1980s.
“It is not enough to sympathize with the aspirations and plight of illegal aliens. We must also consider the consequences of not controlling our borders,” said the late Father Theodore Hesburgh, who served as chairman of the U.S. Select Commission for Immigration and Refugee Policy that was created by the U.S. Congress in the early 1980s. Credit: Photo courtesy of University of Notre Dame
Writing several years after the commission, Hesburgh explained: “It is not enough to sympathize with the aspirations and plight of illegal aliens. We must also consider the consequences of not controlling our borders.”
“What about the aspirations of Americans who must compete for jobs and whose wages and work standards are depressed by the presence of large numbers of illegal aliens?” the legendary late president of the University of Notre Dame reflected. “What about aliens who are victimized by unscrupulous employers and who die in the desert at the hands of smugglers?”
“The nation needn’t wait until we are faced with a choice between immigration chaos and closing the borders,” Hesburgh stated nearly 40 years ago.
Washington D.C., Mar 13, 2018 / 04:07 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- As populists across the U.S. and Europe express discontent with the current state of democracy, George Weigel has pointed to the importance of family and civil society in encouraging and cultivating the virtuous citizenry necessary for democratic renewal.
“Democracy is not a machine that can run by itself,” said George Weigel in the Ethics and Public Policy Center’s 17th annual William E. Simon Lecture held March 6 in Washington, D.C.
“The vitality of the public moral culture is crucial to the democratic project because it takes a certain kind of people, living certain virtues, to make free politics and free economics work so that the net result is genuine human flourishing.”
“The ‘culture of Me’ is incapable of defending the claim that the democratic project, for all its discontents and flaws, is nonetheless morally superior to the various authoritarianisms on offer in the 21st-century world, because it is itself committed to the authoritarianism of the imperial autonomous Self,” warned Weigel, who cited the continued influence of the 1960’s “unbridled self-absorption” and rejection of traditional virtues on today’s public culture.
Two elements of modern American culture that hinder democracy are moral relativism, the idea that “your truth” can be different than “my truth,” and expressive individualism, a certain self-centered notion that “the good” is defined by what an individual wills or wants.
Weigel pointed out that “a truth-starved and morally anorexic culture is incapable of sustaining free politics and free economics because it cannot answer the questions, why be civil and tolerant and why accept the electoral choice of the majority?”
A self-absorbed “culture of Me” is also linked to consumerism, in which “human worth is measured by what a person has rather than who a person is,” said Weigel.
The foundation for rebuilding a virtuous moral culture are the family, religious communities, and civil associations, according to Weigel, who stressed, “the family is of immense importance, because stable families are the first schools of freedom rightly understood as freedom for excellence, freedom for nobility, and freedom for solidarity.”
“The deconstruction of the family by the sexual revolution is closely correlated to many phenomena that now threaten the democratic project, from crime and substance abuse to aggressive forms of identity politics that seek to shut down public debate,” continued Weigel, pointing to the research of Mary Eberstadt.
“Americans must once again affirm that there are self-evident truths that can be known by reason; that knowing these truths teaches us both our obligations and the limits of the legitimate role of the state in our lives; and that affirming these truths is what makes an ‘American’, irrespective of anyone’s grandparents’ country-of-origin,” he continued.
Weigel says he has hope for a renewal of virtue in America’s democracy, but “both conservatives and progressives in these United States need a thorough examination of conscience about their respective responsibilities for our current democratic discontents, which are no longer just a matter of frustration with Washington political dysfunction.”
“Statesmanship requires a firm commitment to certain built-in truths about human beings and their communities, and the skills taught by the virtue of prudence in making those truths live in our common life. So let us measure ourselves, and those who would lead us, by those truths and by that virtue.”
Washington D.C., Feb 21, 2017 / 03:11 pm (CNA/EWTN News).- People with severe mental illness are much more likely to be incarcerated than treated for their disorders, advocates said at a recent panel, and changes need to be made in order to break the v… […]
15 Comments
Mr. Phillips is very quick to demand that others respect him, but he shows no respect for others; just rudeness and bullying.
It is shameful behavior, and that such a man is allowed to torment those poor kids who did *NOTHING* wrong and give maudlin interviews to oh-so-sympathetic reporters is disgraceful. I do not hesitate to use the word “malevolent” about him.
These Native Americans are protesting something, what is it? I believe their protest is against White Nationalism Trump style. There are many who want to believe this is a white Nation. It is not! We are a Nation made of of immigrants, many different colors of skin. When the Natives shouted “You stole our land” why not listen to what they have to say? We cannot continue our denial of what we done to them. On another site I was blacklisted for upholding the perennial teachings of the Church. The truth caused me to be blacklisted. Will the Register do the same?
I think that could go back to ancient times to find something to be offended by, or to find an injustice against ourselves, perceived or otherwise. But to go back to Christopher Columbus and claim that is relevant to a person living today is a bit of a stretch.
Judging by the man who accompanied Mr. Phillips, they were protesting the presence of those of European ethnicity in the United States.
I do not understand how you can conclude credibly that wanting secure borders and not wanting illegal aliens to, among other things, drive up the unemployment and drive down the salaries of lower-income Americans, not a few of whom do not have “white skin,” constitutes “White Nationalism.”
“When the Natives shouted “You stole our land” why not listen to what they have to say? We cannot continue our denial of what we done to them. ”
In this particular instance, I’m not going to listen to anybody who bullies teenagers and lies about it.
And if I did listen to them, what do you propose – that all immigrants and those descended from immigrants leave the country? Then, to take one example, we should send all the people with Anglo-Saxon blood out of Britain and leave it to the Celts. Oh, but wait, the Celts drove out the Picts, didn’t they? And what about the Danes?
And back to the United States, to whom would we give “their” land? Indians were not one monolithic group. Many tribes waged bloody warfare over lands (in contradiction to the myth of the sweet, happy, unified people sitting around holding hands and singing Kumbaya). So – many of them were perfectly happy to *gain* land by conquest; they’re hardly in a position to claim that it’s unjust that they *lost* land the same way.
I’ve not received a degree in History or even close to it, but my understanding of the population of North and South America is that the one time “land bridge” with Asia permitted the development of land previously uninhabited. Everyone came from Adam and Eve…we are all immigrants beyond the Garden! If the argument is that the people from Europe who came by ship later, or up through Central America after landing by ship there, were unfair to those they met here, then maybe we can agree that searches for wealth and fame common to most is at the core of the dispute, not the color of skin. Immigrants from Europe who came legally and immigrants who are coming yet from Central and South America are equal and as deserving of a new home as all who came here before are, including those who identify as “natives”. All here are required by Natural law to try to make room for their “brothers”.
We are a Nation made of(sic) of immigrants, many different colors of skin.
Including every single tribe of American Indians whose ancestors migrated to North America across the Bering Strait land bridge from Siberia several millenia ago.
Your subjective opinion and defense of a character as flawed as Nathan Stanard/Phillips is extremely short on facts.
Because WE haven’t done anything to them. We are responsible for our own sins, not those of someone who lived centuries before we were born. Simple as that.
Why have I been blacklisted from this site also. On Lifesite News the moderator is a very sensitive man. I spoke in defense of the Church and it hurt his touchy feely sentiments. What hapenned to masculine Catholicism???
If you mean, “Why did my comment not post immediately,” it’s because *nobody’s* comments post immediately. See the yellow box under “Leave a Reply?” It says “All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. Just wait, and your post will show up, unless it breaks the rules the editors have set – “comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published.”
I’m not an editor, just someone who read the statement.
Being banned at LifeSite is a badge of honor. Wear it proudly. Long before the election of Jorge Bergoglio, I was pointing out the culture of intrinsically disordered sexual deviants masquerading as Priests and their goal of destroying the Church. I was banned without explanation. With the revelations unleashed by grand jury reports, Archbishop Vigano’s testimonies, Wuerl’s behavior in Pennsylvania and DC and his getting caught lying about his knowledge of McCarrick, the none too secret rumors about McCarrick being confirmed, the behavior of Cupich, Tobin, Dolan, McElroy, et al, the behavior of the Peronist Pontiff, the behavior of the St. Gallen Mafia, the curia, Kasper, Marx, Danneels, et al, I’ve been vindicated. I’m still banned though and I’m proud of the fact that people like that don’t want to read opinions like mine. That doesn’t stop them from attempting to solicit donations from me to keep them afloat.
Mr. Phillips is very quick to demand that others respect him, but he shows no respect for others; just rudeness and bullying.
It is shameful behavior, and that such a man is allowed to torment those poor kids who did *NOTHING* wrong and give maudlin interviews to oh-so-sympathetic reporters is disgraceful. I do not hesitate to use the word “malevolent” about him.
These Native Americans are protesting something, what is it? I believe their protest is against White Nationalism Trump style. There are many who want to believe this is a white Nation. It is not! We are a Nation made of of immigrants, many different colors of skin. When the Natives shouted “You stole our land” why not listen to what they have to say? We cannot continue our denial of what we done to them. On another site I was blacklisted for upholding the perennial teachings of the Church. The truth caused me to be blacklisted. Will the Register do the same?
I think that could go back to ancient times to find something to be offended by, or to find an injustice against ourselves, perceived or otherwise. But to go back to Christopher Columbus and claim that is relevant to a person living today is a bit of a stretch.
To what Register are you referring?
Judging by the man who accompanied Mr. Phillips, they were protesting the presence of those of European ethnicity in the United States.
I do not understand how you can conclude credibly that wanting secure borders and not wanting illegal aliens to, among other things, drive up the unemployment and drive down the salaries of lower-income Americans, not a few of whom do not have “white skin,” constitutes “White Nationalism.”
“When the Natives shouted “You stole our land” why not listen to what they have to say? We cannot continue our denial of what we done to them. ”
In this particular instance, I’m not going to listen to anybody who bullies teenagers and lies about it.
And if I did listen to them, what do you propose – that all immigrants and those descended from immigrants leave the country? Then, to take one example, we should send all the people with Anglo-Saxon blood out of Britain and leave it to the Celts. Oh, but wait, the Celts drove out the Picts, didn’t they? And what about the Danes?
And back to the United States, to whom would we give “their” land? Indians were not one monolithic group. Many tribes waged bloody warfare over lands (in contradiction to the myth of the sweet, happy, unified people sitting around holding hands and singing Kumbaya). So – many of them were perfectly happy to *gain* land by conquest; they’re hardly in a position to claim that it’s unjust that they *lost* land the same way.
I’ve not received a degree in History or even close to it, but my understanding of the population of North and South America is that the one time “land bridge” with Asia permitted the development of land previously uninhabited. Everyone came from Adam and Eve…we are all immigrants beyond the Garden! If the argument is that the people from Europe who came by ship later, or up through Central America after landing by ship there, were unfair to those they met here, then maybe we can agree that searches for wealth and fame common to most is at the core of the dispute, not the color of skin. Immigrants from Europe who came legally and immigrants who are coming yet from Central and South America are equal and as deserving of a new home as all who came here before are, including those who identify as “natives”. All here are required by Natural law to try to make room for their “brothers”.
The truth or your opinion of the truth?
We are a Nation made of(sic) of immigrants, many different colors of skin.
Including every single tribe of American Indians whose ancestors migrated to North America across the Bering Strait land bridge from Siberia several millenia ago.
Your subjective opinion and defense of a character as flawed as Nathan Stanard/Phillips is extremely short on facts.
Because WE haven’t done anything to them. We are responsible for our own sins, not those of someone who lived centuries before we were born. Simple as that.
Why have I been blacklisted from this site also. On Lifesite News the moderator is a very sensitive man. I spoke in defense of the Church and it hurt his touchy feely sentiments. What hapenned to masculine Catholicism???
If you mean, “Why did my comment not post immediately,” it’s because *nobody’s* comments post immediately. See the yellow box under “Leave a Reply?” It says “All comments posted at Catholic World Report are moderated. Just wait, and your post will show up, unless it breaks the rules the editors have set – “comments containing obscene language or personal attacks—or those that are deemed by the editors to be needlessly combative or inflammatory—will not be published.”
I’m not an editor, just someone who read the statement.
Incidentally, PaxTecum77, are we to conclude that you are also IesuEt Maria, since you both write the same way?
Being banned at LifeSite is a badge of honor. Wear it proudly. Long before the election of Jorge Bergoglio, I was pointing out the culture of intrinsically disordered sexual deviants masquerading as Priests and their goal of destroying the Church. I was banned without explanation. With the revelations unleashed by grand jury reports, Archbishop Vigano’s testimonies, Wuerl’s behavior in Pennsylvania and DC and his getting caught lying about his knowledge of McCarrick, the none too secret rumors about McCarrick being confirmed, the behavior of Cupich, Tobin, Dolan, McElroy, et al, the behavior of the Peronist Pontiff, the behavior of the St. Gallen Mafia, the curia, Kasper, Marx, Danneels, et al, I’ve been vindicated. I’m still banned though and I’m proud of the fact that people like that don’t want to read opinions like mine. That doesn’t stop them from attempting to solicit donations from me to keep them afloat.
Mr. Phillips should harken to the Latino world on non boring rhythms….
https://youtu.be/2Wv89NBLinE
Even at church its also dangerous nowadays
Native(sic) American activist Nathan Phillips has violent criminal record and escaped from jail as teenager