Next, where the Sirens dwell, you plough the seas; their song is death, and makes destruction please. – The Odyssey of Homer Book 12, Translated by Alexander Pope
According to ancient Greek mythology, the Sirens were enchantresses who, by virtue of the sweetness of their songs, lured unsuspecting sailors to their death.
But it is not from the Greeks that we fist lean the lesson that appearances can be deceiving. In Genesis, the Bible tells us that Eve brought the curse of God upon her by eating the forbidden fruit, which fruit she took from the tree in the midst of the garden. Scripture tells us the tree appeared to her “pleasant to the eyes, and a tree desirable to make one wise.” Likewise, Proverbs teaches “There is a way that seems right to a man, but its end is the way of death.” In the New Testament, Jesus warned his disciples “Take heed that you not be deceived.”
Clearly, deception was a serious problem for the human race in times past. And a cursory glance at the daily news confirms it’s still very much a problem in times present. I say all this by way of introduction to the topic of this short post, refugees. Specifically the Roman Church-State’s teaching about the supposed rights of refugees and the obligations these rights imply for the citizens of the host societies.
I was prompted to revisit this topic by a headline in today’s local paper, which blared “Pastor: ‘Jesus Was A Refugee.’ ” Later in the article, the pastor is quoted as saying “The main reason I’m here [at a rally held at the Cincinnati airport on behalf of refugees and Muslims] is because Jesus was a refugee.”
Now the article doesn’t say where he got the idea that Jesus was a refugee. No further explanation for his remark is given. But it’s fair to say that the ultimate source of his comment – whether the pastor is aware of it or not, I do not know – is the 1952 Apostolic Constitution by Pope Pius XII titled Exsul Familia Nazarethana (EFN). In 1962, an English translation of EFN with commentary was published as a book under the title The Church’s Magna Charta for Migrants.
EFN begins,
The émigré Holy Family of Nazareth, fleeing into Egypt, is the archetype of every refugee family. Jesus, Mary and Joseph, living in exile in Egypt to escape the fury of an evil king, are, for all times and all places, the models and protectors of every migrant, alien and refugee of whatever kind who, whether compelled by fear of persecution or by want, is forced to leave his native land, his beloved parents and relatives, his close friends, and to seek a foreign soil.
According to the US government, the basic definition of a refugee is a person who “Demonstrates that they were persecuted or fear persecution due to race, religion, nationality, political opinion, or membership in a particular social group.” By this definition, does the Bible support the idea that Jesus’ family were refugees? It the answer is yes. According to the Matthew “[A]n angel of the Lord appeared to Joseph in a dream, saying, ‘Arise, take the young Child and His mother, flee to Egypt, and stay there until I bring you word; for Herod will seek the young Child to destroy Him.’ ”
So far, so good. The pope appears to be right on target, does he not? But as we said at the outset, appearances can be deceiving.
As John Robbins has pointed out, the meaning a term, in this case “refugee,” must be determined by the system in which it is used. And the term “refugee” in the Roman Church-State’s publication EFN has attached to it additional ideas apart from simply a person fleeing persecution. In Rome’s system of thought, refugees have the right to seek refuge, while at the same time the receiving country has an obligation to support them at taxpayer expense.
After 25 pages of boasting about Rome’s record as a defender of human rights – of all organizations, the Roman Church-State should be the last to boast of its human rights record; commenting on the St. Bartholomew’s Day massacre of French Protestants by the Romanists, noted Roman Catholic scholar Lord Acton commented “The Holy See went out of its way to signify to the world, by permanent and solemn acts, how entirely it admired a king who slaughtered his subjects treacherously, because they were Protestants. To proclaim forever that because a man is a Protestant it is a pious deed to cut his throat in the night” – Pope Pius XII gets down to brass tacks.
Then, – according to the teaching of “Rerum Novarum,” – the right of the family to a living space is recognized…
The natural law itself, no less than devotion to humanity, urges that ways of migration be opened to these people. For the Creator of the universe made all good things primarily for the good of all. Since land everywhere offers the possibility of supporting a large number of people, the sovereignty of the State, although it must be respected, cannot be exaggerated to the point that access to this land is, for inadequate or unjustified reasons, denied to needy and decent people from other nations, provided of course, that the public wealth, considered very carefully, does not forbid this.
In other words, don’t even think that you as a citizen have any absolute right to your property. Need is the ultimate claim on the goods of the earth according to Rome. And if those fleeing persecution need your land, well, they have a right to take it. And, as Rome has makes clear elsewhere in its discussion of natural law, not only do refugees have a right to move to your country, but you have an obligation to support them through your tax dollars.
But here’s the thing, nowhere in Matthew’s account of the fight to Egypt do we get any hint that Jesus family went on the public dole while in a foreign land or ever believed they were entitled to do so. In fact, although the Bible is silent on the subject of how Jesus’ family was supported in Egypt, from other passages in Scripture we can say for certain that they were not public welfare cases. Governments produce nothing on their own. For the government to give a dollar to one person, it must first take that dollar from someone else. And since Scripture nowhere authorizes the civil authorities to do this – the Bible knows two, and only two, legitimate functions of government: the punishment of evildoers and the praise of those who do good – for this reason, the proper term for government transfer payments is theft.
In some ways it’s curious that Rome would choose the flight to Egypt as the model for modern day refugees. If for no other reason, the sheer scale of the current refugee flows dwarfs the three people who fled to Egypt.
It is even more curious in that there is a very clear example of a large refugee population on the move in Scripture, a mass exodus if you will. And it’s found, oddly enough, in the Book of Exodus. In Chapter 12 we read, “Then the children of Israel journeyed from Rameses to Succoth, about six hundred thousand men on foot, besides children.” Even today, this would be considered a large migration. And with the smaller population of the ancient world, proportionally it was probably much larger than the refugee flows seen today.
But for all that, did God see fit to allow Israel to survive in the wilderness by plundering the surrounding nations? No he did not. God miraculously provided for his people during their forty year trek in the wilderness. The degree of respect shown by the Israelites for private property can be seen in Moses words to Sihon king of the Amorites. “Let me pass through your land. We will not turn aside into fields or vineyards; we will not drink water from your wells. We will go by t he King’s Highway until we have passed through his territory.” Note well. Moses did not assume he and the other million or so Israelites had the right to pass through the land of the Amorites. He instead send messengers to ask, not demand, permission to go along the King’s Highway through Sihon’s territory. And the terms of Israel’s passage included a strict observance of the private property in the land.
Perhaps this passage is a reason why Rome does not appeal to the Exodus as a text for establishing its doctrine of the rights of refugees, for it very clearly denies that there is a right for refugees to make claims on the private property of the people of foreign nations. For that matter, it seems to deny that there is a right to claim refugee or migrant status at all.
Pope Pius XII, as do many who seek to deceive with the Scriptures, appeals to the less clear passage – the flight to Egypt – rather than the more clear passage – the account of the Exodus – in his attempt to establish Rome’s socialist and globalist refugee doctrine. And while Rome’s teaching may appear plausible. Closer examination reveals it as anything but biblical. When seen in the light of Scripture, Rome’s refugee doctrine is a siren song luring unsuspecting nations to their doom.
[…] Paragraph 30 of SNL directly quotes the explicitly globalist Exsul Familia Nazarethana (EFN), the 1952 Apostolic Constitution of Pope Pius XII which has been called the Church’s Magna Carta for Migrants. For my earlier comments on this remarkably evil document, please see here, here, here, here, here, here, and here. […]
[…] The groups chancellor, Cardinal Blasé Cupich of Chicago, openly compares migrants violating US immigration law to “The Holy Family” who fled to Egypt to escape the persecution of King Herod. I’ve dealt with this false comparison a number of times on this blog. See, for example, here. […]
[…] As has been covered in the space before, Exsul Familia Nazarethana (EFN) is the 1952 Apostolic Constitution by Pope Pius XII in which he formally laid out the Roman Catholic Church State’s (RCCS) position on migration, immigration, and refugee resettlement. In short, the RCCS believes the more migration, the better. […]