I’ve probably gotten far afield from the issue of immigration, from where I began this reflection. However, the point I am trying to make is that immigration is tied up with the self-identity of a people, especially when immigration is at a level sufficient to make the host community feel uncomfortable, confused and frustrated. This happens when the ethnic and cultural self-identity of a people seems threatened. As I noted before, I don’t present discomfort, confusion, frustration, anger or ethnic conflict as a good thing but as a simple reality with which me must deal. So far, I have tried to explain how this reality came about. In the rest of this reflection I turn to a possible Christian response to this reality.
During his pontificate so far, Pope Francis has stressed several practices as critical to Christian life; these include dialogue, reaching out to those at the margins of society and mercy.
You hear the word “polarized” a lot nowadays. It refers to the idea that people are finding it increasingly difficult to get along with one another. All issues seem to be divided into at least two camps who can’t agree on anything. They are like the “poles” of a magnet. They push each other apart. These camps demonize the other as evil, immoral or just plain wrong. Neither camp is willing to listen to the other on the remote possibility that they might have something important to say.
When the Pope is faced with important and complex issues he will call for a committee or even a synod. These gatherings have members from all over the spectrum on the issue being discussed. It is common for sparks to fly during the discussion, which is what Pope Francis is trying to achieve. He wants the issue looked at from every angle and if the committee or synod is comprised only of “yes men” there is a strong chance that some important insights will not be brought up.
Dialogue isn’t just about debate points. It is about getting to know the others and their experience of the issue being discussed. Normally, people don’t argue a point just to be obstinate. Based on their experience, the point is important to them. In a healthy dialogue, you don’t have to agree with the other side but it is essential to reach an understanding of why the issue is so important to them. Such an understanding allows the decision maker to find consensus and a more effective resolution that benefits the common good, rather than one or the other camp. The Synod on the Family last year gave voice to all kinds of perspectives. The Pope didn’t shut down debate when participants expressed concerns that were different from his; rather, he encouraged the debate and had tried to take those perspectives into account. That is the fruit of dialogue.
The wealthy and powerful are usually at the center of many controversial issues. They can get their concerns addressed and their perspectives considered. It is the poor and the powerless who are generally ignored, since there are few consequences if they are ignored. Except that these are just the ones for whom Christ came. These are the people to whom Jesus ministered. These are the people to whom Jesus tried to give hope.
Pope Francis encourages the Christian to go out to the margins of society and minister to the vulnerable and powerless. He admonishes the clergy to get out of their comfortable offices and get into the slums, barrios and favelas where the poor are struggling to survive and see to their needs both physical and spiritual. If the poor of society are weak and divided, it is to the advantage of the powerful. When the people at the margins realize that by working together for the common good, they become powerful. This power doesn’t need to result in conflict but can simply be the power of voicing their needs, seeing how they can help themselves to better their situation and wield power in elections where politicians who listen to them are the ones elected to office. This is justice at the most basic level in any society.