TEACHING UNIT III “DO NOT OPPRESS THE IMMIGRANT;

YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS TO BE AN IMMIGRANT…” (Ex 23:9) Human Rights and Migration

I. OBJECTIVES:

a. Reflect upon human rights in relation to migrants b. Discover the biblical vision on migration as it sheds a different light on our relationship

with God (“the God of the tent”) and with the destitute. c. The migrants in the social teaching of the Church.

II. OPENING PRAYER: “ I am an Alien”

III. INTRODUCTORY ACTIVITY

Self Assessment Quiz IV. SHARING GOD’S WORD

a) Samuel 7:17 b) Deuteronomy 24: 14-22 c) Matthew 20: 1-16 d) Zechariah 7: 8-10 e) Leviticus 19: 33-34

V. STUDY SESSION

a) The concept of Human Rights – Group Activity b) The myths and manipulation of Human Rights c) The Human Rights of the migrants - Discussion d) Bible and Human Rights e) The Church and Human Rights of the Migrants – Group Activity

VI. HOMEWORK VII. EVALUATION

VIII. CLOSING PRAYER

2

IX. OPENING PRAYER Unit III From the United States Catholic Conference, Washington , “Who are my Sisters and Brothers?”, Washington, 1996, p. 149. __________________________________________________________________________

I am an Alien By Wilfrid Suprena

I am an alien, I took the road sixty thousand years ago, looking for a blue and clement sky, fresh air, bright sun, waving seas and a land of friendship and solidarity. I am an alien, I left behind a devastating land absorbed day after day, piece by piece by a powerful and attractive force that my fellow aliens could not stop. I am an alien, the planet Earth welcomes me; the moon, the oceans, the mountains, the rivers, the valleys, the trees, the birds, the fishes, the animals in general are pleased with me. I am an alien, I have no color, I am dark skin, red skin. I have no citizenship, no nationality, no ideology, no religion. I am an alien, I am Jew, Arab, Muslim, Christian, Buddhist, Catholic, Protestant, Palestinian, Bosnian, Tutsi, Hutu, Haitian, Cuban Sudanese, Mexican. I am an alien and you treat me like a pariah. You made me slave in Ancient Rome; I built castles, palaces, roads, churches for you, kings and popes, in the Middle Ages. I am an alien and you rejected me, you killed me and my fellow aliens by thousands to conquer the gold mines in Peru, Brazil, Mexico, Hispaniola, Columbia, Venezuela. I am an alien and in my head, my heart and my body, I continue to bear the scars of Vega Real, Austerlitz, Auschwitz, Nagasaki, Hiroshima and Baghdad. Today, I am still an alien and a refugee, looking for a safe haven in Central America, in Guantanamo, Croatia, Germany, Sweden and Zaire. Close the border, the aliens are coming; Prepare the executive orders, the aliens are coming; Recruit new immigration police officers, the aliens are coming. Starting Point I am an alien, I need a passport, a visa, a permit of entry, an alien card, an adjustment of status, a lawyer only to be with you, to live among you. I am an alien. I am a woman. I am a man.

3

III. INTRODUCTORY ACTIVITY Unit III Leader: Have participants complete this Self-Assessment Quiz and then go over the correct

answers with them. Self -Assessment on Immigrants and Refugees

For each statement, circle “True” or “False”. 1. True or False: Most immigrants who have come to the United States in the last few years did not enter the country legally. 2. True or False: U.S. immigration laws have never excluded immigrants or refugees based on their nationality (country of origin). 3. True or False: The United States accepts more refugees each year than any other country. 4. True or False: The primary reason that immigrants come to the United States is that they are drawn by the many benefits available through health care, welfare, education, and other services. 5 True or False: Undocumented immigrants in the United States are a drain on the economy because they receive services and do not pay taxes. 6 True or False: Under the current U.S. immigration system, there are limits on how many people immigrate each year and how many can immigrate from each country. 7. True or False: The U.S. Supreme Court has decided that all children have a right to primary and secondary public education in the United States, regardless of their immigration status. 8. True or False: Most undocumented immigrants have entered the United States illegally by crossing the United States-Mexico border. 9. True or False: While many immigrants themselves remain dominant in their native language, children of immigrants almost always become dominant in the English language. 10. True or False: About two-thirds of all the refugees in the world are young men. 11. True or False: All persons born in the United States are automatically citizens of the United States, and some other people later obtain citizenship through a process called naturalization. 12 True or False: Once a person has legally immigrated to the United States, he or she is eligible to petition for immigrant visas for all of his/her family members. 13. True or False: If a non-citizen of the United States does not have a “green card,” he or she is probably not in the country legally. 14 True or False: The acculturation process of newcomers to the United States is a lifelong and complicated challenge which affects all members of the family who have

immigrated. 15. True or False: The current level of immigration to the United States each year is double the amount of any other time in the country’s history. From the United States Catholic Conference, Washington, “Who are my Sisters and Brothers?” Washington , 1996, p. 20-22

4

Self – Assessment Answers on Immigrants and Refugees Unit III

1. False. Most immigrants – more than 85 percent—come to the United States legally. A little more than 1.1 million immigrants arrive in the United States each year. Of these, about 700,000 enter as lawful permanent residents and another 100,000 – 150,000 enter legal as refugees or others fleeing persecution. Roughly 300,000 undocumented immigrants (people without legal status) enter the United States each year.

2. False. Unfortunately, throughout the history of the United States, there have been various

examples of exclusion based on nationality or racial groups. The Chinese Exclusion Act of 1882 was the first such specific law. Later laws restricted immigration by other Asians, and the national origins “quota” system of the early twentieth century favored those ethnic groups who dominated the U.S. population in 1920 (Northern Europeans).

3. False. The United States accepts a certain number of refugees each year, determined by the

President in consultation with Congress. Only about 1 percent of the approximately 20 million refugees in the world (according to the United Nations) are in the United States. While some other developed countries – such as Canada, Australia, and some in Europe – resettle significant numbers of refugees, most seek temporary refuge or re-settlement in other countries within their own regions.

4. False. The primary reasons why people immigrate to the United States are to reunite with

close family members (64 percent), because U.S. employers need their skills (14 percent), and to seek refuge from persecution (16 percent). There are many restrictions on access to health and welfare benefits even for legal immigrants (undocumented people are almost completely excluded), and those who are eligible for such services often use them less frequently than U.S. citizens.

5. False. States with higher numbers of undocumented people do spend money on providing

services such as public education and emergency health care to them. Undocumented immigrants, however, contribute through many forms of taxes – sales taxes, property taxes, income taxes and Social Security Deductions, license and permit fees, gasoline and beverage taxes, etc. The Urban Institute has estimated that undocumented immigrants pay about $7 billion per year in taxes.

6. True. The U.S. immigration system sets an overall annual limit on immigration. It also sets

limits on how many can immigrate in each of the distinct family and employment categories, how many refugees can be admitted each year, and how many people can immigrate from each country

7. True. The U.S. Supreme Court affirmed in the 1982 case Plyler v.Doe that education is a

basic right of all children. Because undocumented and other children have no control over their immigration status or presence in the United States, the Court held that all children are entitled to public education through the secondary level, and that schools may not ask for immigration or Social Security documentation for enrollment.

8. False. Slightly more than half of all undocumented immigrants in the United State have not

entered over the border, but rather have come to the United States with a temporary “nonimmigrant” visa and did not depart. Only about one-third of all undocumented persons are from Mexico; the other most common nationalities include Canada and some European countries. Undocumented immigrants constitute only about 1 percent of the total U.S. population.

5

9. True. Statistics and studies of immigrant families from all ethnic groups continually show that children of immigrants and those who immigrate as children retain their native language in the home but quickly become English-dominant through school and other means of acculturation. Many adult immigrants speak English when they arrive in the United States, and most others are highly motivated to learn English; this is more difficult for some immigrants, depending on age, level of education, availability of English classes, or working more that on job.

10. False. It is difficult to get accurate and complete data on refugee populations because they

are often in large groups or are on the move. While characteristics of refugee populations vary among countries and regions, depending on the direct causes of each refugee situation, there is an increasing proportion (some estimate as high as 75 percent) of women and children among the world’s refugees.

11. True. The U.S. Constitution, specifically the Fourteenth Amendment, provides that all persons

born in the United States are automatically citizens of this country. In 1790, Congress passed the first laws providing for al “naturalization” process through which immigrants could apply for U.S. citizenship. Among other things, current law requires an immigrant to have fire years of permanent residence, to be a person of good moral character, and to pass an English, civics, and history test

12. False. Under U.S. immigration laws, a person who has become a legal immigrant (called a

“permanent resident”) is eligible to petition only for certain members of his or her immediate family (spouses, children), and this process takes a long time. Even U.S. citizens can petition only for certain family members, and extended family members such as grandparents, aunts and uncles, cousins, in-laws, etc., are not eligible.

13. False. Permanent residents are legal immigrants and each has a document commonly

referred to as a “green card” as evidence of that status. Other than permanent residents, however, there are many other categories of lawful immigration status, which are temporary, like foreign students, tourists, certain business visitors, company employees, performers, etc. The “green card” is not the only valid document, which shows that a non-citizen is in the United States legally.

14. True. The migration experience, even in the best of circumstances and more so for persons

who have been traumatized by war or persecution, always has complicated and lifelong effects. The affects every member of the immigrant family in different ways. The challenge of finding one’s place in a totally new setting is a process, which involves integrating some elements of native culture and experience with elements of new culture.

15. False. The levels of immigration to the United States during the 1980’s and early 1990’s are

actually very similar to the numbers of immigrants during the period 1900-1910. As of 1990, “foreign-born” persons were only about 8 percent of the U.S. population, less than at the end of the nineteenth century when they were about 15 percent.

6

IV. SHARING GOD’S WORD Unit III Leader: Divide the group in five different sub-groups. Each of the sub-groups will read and meditate on one of the following passages:

1. 2 Samuel 7:1-7 2. Deuteronomy 24, 14-22 3. Matthew 20, 1-16 4. Zechariah 7, 8-10 5. Leviticus 19, 33-34

a. How does the reading of 2 Sam challenge your image of God?

b. How does Deut 24 move you to solidarity? What should society do to show concrete solidarity to the migrants in the fields of social welfare, education, housing, jobs, etc?

c. The Gospel suggests treating latecomers equally, even though this does not seem fair. Why does history repeat itself and old generations of immigrants do not welcome newcomers?

d. “Do not oppress the immigrants”, says the prophet Zechariah. How do you see oppression against migrants reflected in the structures of our society?

e. According to Leviticus 19, migrants enjoy the same rights of the citizens of the country they live in. According to immigration law they shouldn’t and don’t. What do you think?

7

V. STUDY Unit III 1. The Concepts of Human Rights: What are they? They were born out of the necessity of protecting the human dignity of people from the oppression of the powerful. The struggle for human rights is ongoing and its affirmation has been a long and difficult journey that is far from over. People and organizations have been using different concepts of human rights:

• The UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) says that all individuals have the right to life, to freedom and to the security of their own person.

• The Declaration of the Organization of the American States (1948) says that all human

beings regardless of race, sex, nationality, religious belief or social condition, have the right to material welfare, spiritual development, in conditions of freedom, dignity, equality of opportunities and economic security.

• American Convention of Human Rights (1969) says that the essential rights of a

human being do not derive from his being a citizen of a particular country, but have their foundations in the attributes of the human being, reason for what they justify an international protection of a conventional nature complementing what the internal rights of the American States are offering.

Kofi Annan, UN General Secretary, says: “Human rights are not privileges that governments grant or take away at will because they cannot be dissociated from the value that we bestow on human dignity. The responsibility of the governments is to ensure that exist the necessary conditions so that all human beings can enjoy their fundamental rights: the right to life, security, education, to freedom of expression, opinion, and association…but it is up to each of us to make them ours, to transform them into a reality in our personal and collective lives. In regards to human rights all human beings have a duty of conscience and vigilance.” (Carmelo Garcia. Los Derechos Humanos en la Situacion Actual del Mundo. Madrid: PPC, 1999. P. 206). We can say that the historical development of human rights has gone hand in hand with the complex history of the conscience and recognition of the fundamental value of human dignity. The famous UN Universal Declaration of 1948 comes after the trauma of World War II that had caused so much death and destruction. In this Declaration the UN try in a certain way to summarize and present to a traumatized humanity the fundamental human rights that have to become the basis of renewed international, national and interpersonal relationships. The experts in this field talk about three generations of human rights:

1. Civil and Political Rights. They go back to the time of the French Revolution (1789). 2. Economic, Social and Cultural Rights. They belong to the time of the Industrial

revolution of the XIX century. 3. Rights related to solidarity. They are the rights claimed after World War II by

countries that had just gotten rid or were still subjected to the colonial oppression.

8

Scholars are already talking about a fourth generation of human rights referring to different groups of people like women, indigenous, children, minorities, migrants, AIDS patients, ecological rights, etc. Gimbernat, Jose Antonio. Los Derechos Humanos. A los Cincuenta Años de la Declaracion de 1948. Santander: Sal Terrae, 1998. Pp. 7-13.

“The Making of a Hybrid Framework

The immediate circumstance that led to the formulation of human rights in its contemporary form was the experience of Second World War. In particular, the horrendous experience of Nazi concentration camps, barbaric genocide, gas-chambers (euphemistically called "shower baths"!), the brutal use of human beings for medical experiments, the practice of eugenics, etc., shook the conscience of civilized humanity.1Such experiences exposed the kind of irrationality and anti-humanism that can be engendered, ironically, under the pretext of creating an order of perfect nationality.2 If the concrete experience of the war lent urgency to the need for a set of universal human rights, the inspiration behind them derived from two sources. In the main, the modern proclamation of human rights was nourished by the liberal tradition, which, as the history of its genesis shows, was centered on the claims for civil and political rights. An important corrective to the one-sidedness of this tradition was the introduction by the United Nations of cultural and economic rights into the purview of human rights.3 This latter tradition brought with it the experience of the many struggles and battles fought by the socialists right from the middle of the 19th century. In short, we have a certain hybridity in the articulation of human rights with two traditions not fully integrated. The tensions experienced between these two traditions in the context of the Cold War made plain how shaky the framework is.

The Shifting Scenario

Whether in the liberal or in the socialist tradition, human rights have political power as their main point of reference. In fact, the liberal tradition is associated with the struggle to check and control the absolute sovereignty claimed by rulers — first the monarchs and later by the sovereign States.4 Individual human beings are endowed with inalienable rights, which the State cannot prevail against, but should submit itself to. Similarly, in the socialist tradition, the responsibility is vested in the State for providing the most basic amenities for a dignified human life, and to recognize the cultural rights of various peoples.

The focus of human rights is today changing. This is because the state is no more the sole public offender of human rights, nor the only agency that could be held responsible for the security of the citizens. Transnational capitalism with its global market and trade pervades every sector of human living. It has become an insidious violator of human rights. In the face of its prowess the nation-states have become like mute and powerless sheep. Now, the present human rights framework is attuned to combat violations by the state. Strategies and mechanisms have been created mainly to monitor the state’s functioning in respect to human rights. The fact is that the dominant developmental model and the new transnational economic system have caused an unprecedented serious crisis in human rights. They violate

9

the basic rights of the poor such as the right to food, basic medical care, primary education, etc.5 Unfortunately we do not have any adequate means to hold under check and control this new leviathan — economic absolutism. As the present set of human rights came to existence by combating state absolutism, so the poor require today new ways and means to combat and protect themselves from this new economic absolutism, which demands a lot of human sacrifices.

The change is characterized also by the entry of new interlocutors in the arena of human rights. Gender has become an important human rights issue; 6 so too ethnic, linguistic and cultural minorities and indigenous peoples have brought in new aspects and dimensions which simply could not be deduced from a general set of human rights valid for all.7 We cannot ignore the fact that in most parts of the world today, these are the burning issues of human rights. The Cold War accusations and polemics on human rights have given place to a politics of human rights between the North and the South.8

As a result of all these developments, there is a shift of focus also on the theoretical discourse of human rights. The attention is being directed to new areas of discussion from the debates which once centered on such issues as the universality of human rights, their foundation, to the interconnection between civil and political rights on the one hand and economic, social and cultural rights on the other. We are assisting today at a process of heavy ideology-building: I mean the States and the economic forces are engaged in theory building to justify the violation of human rights. From these ideological bastions human rights need to be freed. And this adds to the complexity of the present-day scenario of human rights and the tasks before us.” (taken From Felix Wilfred, pp. 1-2.)

10

GROUP ACTIVITY Unit III Leader:

a. Read, in turn, each of the UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights (1948) b. Participants identify to which generation each of its human rights belongs.

UNITED NATIONS UNIVERSAL DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS (Summary)

1. All human beings are born free, and are equal in dignity and rights. 2. All human beings share these rights-without exceptions. 3. Everyone has the right to life, liberty and to be secure. 4. No human being should be made a slave. 5. No one should be tortured. 6. Every human being is a person before the law. 7. Everyone should be protected by the law. 8. Anyone who breaks the law should be punished. 9. No one should be arrested without good reason. 10. Everyone has the right to a fair trial. 11. Everyone should be considered innocent until proven guilty. 12. Everyone has the right to privacy for his family and home. 13. Everyone is free to live and travel where he or she wants. 14. Everyone has the right to travel to another country to be safe. 15. Everyone has the right to a nationality or to change nationalities. 16. Men and women have the right to marry, and the family should be protected by the state. 17. Everyone has the right to own property. 18. Everyone has the right to freedom of religion and conscience. 19. Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression. 20. Everyone has the right to meet with others. 21. Everyone has the right to participate in government and to vote. 22. Everyone has the right to social security. 23. Everyone has the right to work, and to equal pay for equal work. 24. Everyone has the right to rest and leisure, and to paid holidays. 25. Everyone has the right to a decent standard of living and to some protection when out of

work, sick, or elderly. Mothers and children must be cared for. 26. Everyone has the right to free education. Parents choose their child’s education. 27. Everyone has the right to enjoy cultural events. 28. Everyone has the right to live where the rights of this Declaration are guaranteed. 29. Everyone has the right and duty to respect the rights and freedoms of others. 30. No one has the right to deny any rights mentioned in this Declaration.

11

2. The Myths and Manipulation of Human Rights The Human Rights discourse has been misunderstood and manipulated. For instance, it is not uncommon to hear conversations about human rights being used not to protect honest people, but to shield criminals from a well-deserved punishment. It is also not uncommon to find out that some human rights organizations are being funded and used by governments just to give the impression that they are working in favor of those whose rights are unprotected. “Like many things in real life and history, human rights are characterized by a radical ambiguity. We would naturally expect that they further the cause of the poor. But in reality, they are being turned into means to protect mostly the powerful, and least those in need, the poor and the marginalized victims. This is a curious story of inversion. Examples are legion which show how factors such as selfishness and institutionalization can twist and invert ideals and principles in such a way that they end up supporting the very things against which they originally stood. Fifty years after the United Nations declared the universal human rights; the world stands in need of testing this legal instrument to find out what really has become – one more addition to the armory of the powerful, or a “weapon of the weak”? The future of human rights lies on whether even now we can redeem them to be the rights of the marginalized. It is only by bringing the shelter-less poor under the protection of these rights that human rights will acquire their true universal value. Not only are human rights inverted, but the discourse on them is being appropriated by the globalizing forces. These have taken upon themselves the task of defining the meaning and scope of human rights and laying down the parameters of their operation. Curiously enough, the very forces who are the most blatant violators of the rights of the poor pose themselves as their guardians and protectors. The challenge before us is to ensure that these rights become in effect the rights of the poor and that the discourse on human rights is restored on them.” (Felix Wilfred, Human Rights or the Rights of the Poor? (p.1) 3. The Human Rights of the Migrants Leader: (have group)

1. Review these case studies on the violation of the rights of the immigrants. 2. Identify what human rights have been violated in each of these cases.

LETTERS FROM DETAINEES

During our research, Human Rights Watch received hundreds of letters from people detained by the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service and held in local jails. Most wrote because they had no family, friends, or legal counsel to turn to and needed to express their desperation, frustration, and fears to someone.

12

Dear Human Rights Watch:

June 11, 1998 "Since the day I came to America [September 28, 1997], I have not committed any crime. I have never been in any type of prison system but when I came here they locked me up like I'm some kind of criminal...they locked me up along with inmates, people that have committed crimes...that's why I fear

for my life....The situation here is no good for me, because they don't offer the basic needs in which to live. The food they give us is not enough to live on. When I request something from the officers they either deny me or tell me to write a request form, which they deny afterwards anyways. I don't have an attorney for I cannot afford one. I escaped from my country's army to come to America, but if I go back now to Iran, the consequences will be deadly." -P.H. from Iran, Nacogdoches County Jail, Nacogdoches, Texas

February 5, 1998 "Let me inform you that I was violently beaten today...at 10:30 this morning. It was time for my `checkdown' and an officer told me to put my hands on the wall. It's because I asked him to be more gentle that he beat me up. He hit my head into the wall many times and threw me forcefully on the floor. To hold me down, an officer put his foot on my head. I let them do whatever they wanted. Here it is normal for officers to beat detainees without reason.... I think your presence here would be indispensable." -E.M. from Democratic Republic of the Congo, Virginia Beach Detention Center, Virginia Beach, Virginia

June 3, 1998 "Again I ask you to please help me...I don't know what to think, maybe they want me to die in this place....I already paid my time in state prison and now they put me again in prison far away where [my family] can't visit me because it is an eight hour journey. Also, they no longer let us send letters so I had to send this letter out with some county prisoners detained here...." -F.T.G. from Cuba, Yuba County Jail, Marysville, California

March 1, 1998 "I was born in Hamburg, Germany on January 14, 1948 in a refugee camp...my parents came form the U.S.S.R. We were brought to the United States as legal permanent residents by Catholic Services. I'm fifty-years old now and have been in the United States for forty-eight years. In 1990 I went to jail...and when I was ready to go home the INS arrested me. Since September 6, 1996, I have been waiting to be deported. Germany has already told the INS that they will not accept me, have no records of me at all or of my parents either.... I always showed up in court and never ran from [the INS]. I asked them to release me and I would go on my own, but they said no one would take me. Why still hold me then? " -M.J. from Germany, Snyder County Jail, Selingsgrove, Pennsylvania

January 8, 1998 "In June of 1997 my application for immigrant status with the Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) was rejected. Since then, my presence in the United States became illegal, and

13

that is why I was arrested.... After the ruling I was placed in solitary confinement, in a cell with no heat and no hot water. I was not allowed to use the telephone to talk to my lawyer. A Muslim prison employee was prevented from giving me a copy of the Quran. I was not allowed to perform Friday congregational prayers with other Muslim inmates, nor could I go to the gymnasium. To this day, jail management refuses to provide a vegetarian meal. I do not eat meat because of religious convictions. Since my arrest, I have lost 25 pounds...." -N.S. from Egypt, Mercy County Detention Center, Trenton, New Jersey

November 17, 1997 "[I am] Vietnamese, 21 years old.... Because I have no lawyer or legal representative I did not appeal the judge's decision in proper time and from the information from the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees office I filed a motion to reopen or to reconsider my case along with my political asylum application. [It was] denied on August 1, 1997. Now I don't know what to do and who I can ask for help. Please, somebody help me on this matter. I've been in this detention center for over a year for nothing, we have no sunlight, no fresh air nor life necessity." -T.N. from Vietnam, Carter County Detention Center, Ardmore, Oklahoma

Leader: Have participants read and discuss the following list of the human rights of the immigrants.

What other rights would you add to this list? • Right to migrate • Right not to migrate • Rights to political asylum • Right to economic asylum • Rights of the family • Cultural rights • Religious rights • Right of free circulation and residence • Right to association • Right of nationality and to change nationality • Right to medical assistance • Labor rights • Right to education • Right to no discrimination

4. Bible and Human Rights

a) The faith experience of the people of Israel reveals a God who accompanies them in their history through good and bad times. Yahweh is primarily a God who walks with the people: “one thing makes this god different from the divinities found just about everywhere in those days. All those deities were linked to particular places, mountains, rivers, cities, regions, whereas the god that speaks to Abraham is a god who is not tied down to one spot. This god is a sojourner god, a pilgrim god” (Brother John of Taizé). Yahweh is not a static, sedentary God, but a migrant God who is

14

always present in the journey of the people of Israel (Exodus 13: 21-22; Psalms 68:7-8; 77:19-20). Yahweh never leaves Israel in its pilgrimage: Yahweh is the true Leader of this journey, the Presence that gives a sense of orientation and direction. See also 2 Sam 7: 1-7. Very interestingly this essential element of God’s identity as a migrant God appears forcefully in the New Testament revealing an often ignored continuity between Yahweh, the God of Israel, and the God of Jesus Christ. The author of the Gospel of John in its famous prologue tells us that Jesus, the Word become flesh, “pitched his tent” among us (John 1:14). In fact the Greek word that is often translated as “dwell” is eskenosen, which comes from the word skene that means tent. God does not want to abandon the tent and in Jesus God pitches a tent once again in the midst of humanity in order to bring light and salvation to all.

b) The foundation of human rights is the sacredness of human dignity. John Paul II says; “the dignity of the human person is a transcendent value, always recognized as such by those who sincerely search for the truth. Indeed the whole of human history should be interpreted in the light of this certainty. Every person, created in the image and likeness of God (Genesis 1: 26-28) and therefore radically oriented towards the Creator, is constantly in relationship with those possessed of the same dignity. To promote the good of the individual is thus to serve the common good, which is that point where rights and duties converge and reinforce one another.” (Message for World Day of Peace 1999, 2).

c) The Bible shows special concern for the poor and the powerless. God is first revealed to the people of Israel in the book of Exodus as the God who listens to the desperate cry of the downtrodden and the oppressed. The divine concern for the poor and the powerless is not something peculiar to Israel. Others Ancient Near eastern societies, like the Babylonian and the Egyptian shared the same concern. For all of them God, and God’s main representative, the king, cared for the poor which were exemplified in the categories of the widow and the orphan. Interestingly enough the divine concern for the immigrant, and the laws in his favor, is something peculiar to Israel. There cannot be found anything similar in other Ancient Near Eastern societies. This peculiarity is due to the unique history of the people of Israel, which since the beginning are a people of immigrant slaves (see Exodus). Its ancestors and leaders are immigrants: Abraham and his clan, the same people of Israel in the Babylonian exile. In fact we can rightly affirm that immigrants are the models of God’s election in the Old Testament. In the New Testament we have just to refer to Jesus’ words “I was a stranger and you welcomed me” (Matthew 25:35) to see how important becomes to welcome an immigrant because in him/her Jesus makes himself present.

5. The Church and Human Rights of the Migrants The Catholic Church, particularly through its official representatives, has recently become quite outspoken on the protection of human rights. Such an intervention marks a change in the church approach to the issue. Born out of anti-clerical movements and carrying deep ambiguities, human rights were looked upon by the church as “individualistic and egotistical claims which destroyed the social fabric and represented rebellion against God on the part of man” (Rutayisire, 1990). The most decisive shift on the catholic side was operated by Pope John XXIII with the encyclical “Pacem in Terris” (1963), which provides a charter of the rights and responsibilities of human beings, and by the Vatican II declaration on religious liberty “Dignitatis Humanae” (1965). Taken from Battistella Graziano, 257.

15

Church Documents on Human Rights

Message of John Paul II for the World day of Peace 1999

1. “The Universal Declaration is clear: it acknowledges the rights which it proclaims but does not confer them, since they are inherent in the human person and in human dignity. Consequently, no one can legitimately deprive another person, whoever they may be, of these rights, since this would do violence to their nature. All human beings, without exception, are equal in dignity. For the same reason, these rights apply to every stage of life and to every political, social, economic and cultural situation. Together they form a single whole, directed unambiguously towards the promotion of every aspect of the good of both the person and society…Defense of the universality and indivisibility of human rights is essential for the construction of a peaceful society and for the overall development of individuals, peoples and nations. To affirm the universality and indivisibility of rights is not to exclude legitimate cultural and political differences in the exercise of individual rights, provided that in every case the levels set for the whole of humanity by the Universal Declaration are respected.”

12. “When the violation of any fundamental human right is accepted without reaction, all other rights are placed at risk. It is therefore essential that there should be a global approach to the subject of human rights and a serious commitment to defend them. Only when a culture of human rights which respects different traditions becomes an integral part of humanity’s moral patrimony shall we be able to look to the future with serene confidence.”

Message of John Paul II for World Day of Peace 2000 7. …An offense against human rights is an offense against the conscience of humanity as such, an offense against humanity itself. The duty of protecting these rights therefore extends beyond the geographical and political borders within which they are violated. Crimes against humanity cannot be considered an internal affair of a nation. Here an important step forward was taken with the establishment of an International Criminal Court to try such crimes, regardless of the place or circumstances in which they are committed. We must thank God that in the conscience of peoples and nations there is a growing conviction that human rights have no borders, because they are universal and indivisible.” Ecclesia in America 19. “…The fundamental rights of the human person are inscribed in human nature itself; they are willed by God and therefore call for universal observance and acceptance. No human authority can infringe upon them by appealing to majority opinion or political consensus, on the pretext of respect for pluralism and democracy. Therefore, the Church must be committed to the task of educating and supporting laypeople involved in lawmaking, government and the administration of justice, so that legislation will always reflect those

16

principles and moral values which are in conformity with a sound anthropology and advance the common good.” 57. “It is appropriate to recall that the foundation on which all human rights rest is the dignity of the person. God’s masterpiece, human being, is made in the divine image and likeness. Jesus took on our human nature, except for sin; he advanced and defended the dignity of every human person, without exception; he died that all might be free. The gospel shows us how Christ insisted on the centrality of the human person in the natural order (Luke 12, 22-29) and in the social and religious orders, even against the claims of the Law (Mark 2: 27): defending men and women (John 8:11) and even children (Matthew 19, 13-15), who in his time and culture occupied an inferior place in society. The human being’s dignity as a child of God is the source of human rights and of corresponding duties. For this reason, ‘every offense against the dignity of a human being is an offense against God himself, in whose image human being is made’ (Puebla, 306). This dignity is common to all, without exceptions, since all have been created in the image of God (Genesis 1: 26). Jesus’ answer to the question ‘Who is my neighbor’ (Luke 10:29) demands of each individual an attitude of respect for the dignity of others and of real concern for them, even if they are strangers or enemies (Luke 10, 30-37). In all parts of America the awareness that human rights must be respected has increased in recent times, yet much still remains to be done, if we consider the violations of the rights of persons and groups still taking place on the continent.” Church Documents on Migrants Ecclesia in America/The Church in America 65. In its history, America has experienced many immigrations, as waves of men and women came to its various regions in the hope of a better future. The phenomenon continues even today, especially with many people and families from Latin American countries who have moved to the northern parts of the continent, to the point where in some cases they constitute a substantial part of the population. They often bring with them a cultural and religious heritage, which is rich in Christian elements. The church is well aware of the problems created by this situation and is committed to spare no effort in developing her own pastoral strategy among these immigrant people, in order to help them settle in their new land and to foster a welcoming attitude among the local population, in the belief that a mutual openness will bring enrichment to all. Church communities will not fail to see in this phenomenon a specific call to live an evangelical fraternity and a t the same time a summons to strengthen their own religious spirit with a view to a more penetrating evangelization. With this in mind, the Synod Fathers recalled that “the church in America must be a vigilant advocate, defending against any unjust restriction the natural right of individual persons to move freely within their own nations and from one nation to another. Attention must be called to the rights of the migrants and their families and to respect for their human dignity, even in cases of non-legal immigration. Migrants should be met with a hospitable and welcoming attitude which can encourage them to become part of the Church’s life, always with due regard for their freedom and their specific cultural identity. Cooperation between the dioceses from which they come and those in which they settle, also through specific pastoral structures provided for in the legislation and praxis of the Church, has proved extremely beneficial to this end. In this way the most adequate and complete pastoral care possible can be ensured. The Church in America must

17

be constantly concerned to provide for the effective evangelization of those recent arrivals who do not yet know Christ. Message of Pope John Paul II for World Migration Day 1996 1. “…One’s irregular status cannot allow the migrant to lose dignity, since everyone is endowed with inalienable rights, which can be neither violated nor ignored. Illegal immigration should be prevented, but it is also essential to combat vigorously the criminal activities which exploit illegal immigration. The most appropriate choice, which will yield consistent and long lasting results, is that of international co-operation which aims to foster political stability and to eliminate underdevelopment. The present economic and social imbalance, which to a large extent encourages the migratory flow, should not be seen as something inevitable, but as a challenge to the human race’s sense of responsibility.” 2. The Church considers the problem of illegal migrants from the standpoint of Christ, who died to gather together the dispersed children of God (John 11: 52), to rehabilitate the marginalized and to bring close those who are distant, in order to integrate all within a communion that is not based on ethnic, cultural or social membership, but on the common desire to accept God’s word and to seek justice. ‘God shows no partiality, but in every nation any one who fears him and does what is right is acceptable to him’ (Acts 10: 34-35). The Church acts in continuity with Christ’s mission. In particular she asks herself how to meet the needs, while respecting the law of those persons who are not allowed to remain in a national territory. She also asks what the right to emigrate is worth without the corresponding right to immigrate. She tackles the problem of how to involve in this work of solidarity those Christian communities frequently infected by public opinion that is often hostile to immigrants.” 3. “…In this perspective, it is very important that public opinion be properly informed about the true situation in the migrants’ country of origin, about the tragedies involving them and the possible risks of returning. The poverty and misfortune with which immigrants are stricken are yet other reasons for generously coming to their aid. It is necessary to guard against the rise of new forms of racism or xenophobic behavior, which attempt to make these brothers and sisters of ours scapegoats for what may be difficult local situations. 4. “I urge the particular churches to encourage reflection, to issue directives and to provide information to help pastoral and social workers to act with discernment in so delicate and complex a matter. When an understanding of the problem is conditioned by prejudice and xenophobic attitudes, the church must not fail to speak up for brotherhood and to accompany it with acts testifying to the primacy of charity…In the church no one is a stranger, and the church is not foreign to anyone, anywhere. As a sacrament of unity and thus a sign and a binding force for the whole human race, the church is the place where illegal immigrants are also recognized and accepted as brothers and sisters. It is the task of the various dioceses actively to ensure that these people, who are obliged to live outside the safety net of civil society, may find a sense of brotherhood in the Christian community. Solidarity means taking responsibility for those in trouble. For Christians, the migrant is not merely an individual to be respected in accordance with the norms established by law, but a person whose presence challenges them and whose needs become an obligation for their responsibility. ‘What have you done to your brother?’ (Genesis 4:9). The answer should not be limited to what is imposed by law, but should be made in the manner of solidarity.”

18

5. “Human being, particularly when weak, defenseless, driven to the margins of society, is a sacrament of Christ’s presence (Matthew 25:40, 45)…It is the Church’s task not only to present constantly the Lord’s teaching of faith but also to indicate its appropriate application to the various situations which the changing times continue to create. Today the illegal immigrant comes before us like that ‘stranger’ in whom Jesus asks to be recognized. To welcome and to show solidarity is a duty of hospitality and fidelity to Christian identity itself.” Message of Pope John Paul II for World Migration Day 1999 6. “The parish, which etymologically means a house where the guest feel at ease, welcomes all and discriminates against none, for no one there is an outsider. It combines the stability and security people feel in their own home with the movement or transience of those who are passing through. Wherever there is a living sense of parish, differences between locals and strangers fade or disappear in the overriding awareness that all belong to God the one Father. The importance of the parish in welcoming the stranger, in integrating baptized persons from different cultures and in dialoguing with believers of other religions stems from the mission of every parish community and its significance within society. This is not an optional, supplementary role for the parish community, but a duty inherent in its task as an institution. Catholicity is not only expressed in the fraternal communion of the baptized, but also in the hospitality extended to the stranger, whatever his religious belief, in the rejection of all racial exclusion and discrimination, in the recognition of the personal dignity of every man and woman and, consequently, in the commitment to furthering their inalienable rights. Group Activity: Leader: Have the participants read and discuss the excerpts from the Church documents on

Migration. Then ask the following questions: (participants may be broken into small groups)

1. Identify the keywords in the suggested texts. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 2. What are the values proposed by the Church to the

community in relation to the migrants? ______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 3. Do you think Catholics are aware of this teaching and consider it relevant in their lives? ________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

19

VI. HOMEWORK Unit III Read: The International Convention of the Protection of the Rights of All Migrant Workers and Members of their Families 1990.

This document can be found at:

http://www.tufts.edu/departments/fletcher/multi/texts/BH983.txt _______________________________________________________________

20

VII. EVALUATION Unit III

1. Very pleased 2. Pleased 3. Not pleased 1. General evaluation of this unit. 1 … 2 … 3 2. Prayers 1 … 2 … 3 3. Introductory Activity 1 … 2 … 3 4. Sharing God’s Word 1 … 2 … 3

5. Study Section:

a) Presentation of the topic 1 … 2 … 3 b) Group Discussion 1 … 2 … 3

6. Impressions of the day. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 7. Expectations, which were not met. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 8. Other comments. ____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

21

VIII. CLOSING PRAYER Unit III PROPHETS OF A FUTURE NOT OUR OWN It helps, now and then, to step back and take the long view. The kingdom is not only beyond our efforts, it is even beyond our vision. We accomplish in our lifetime only a tiny fraction of the magnificent enterprise that is God’s work Nothing we do is complete, which is another way of saying that the kingdom always lies beyond us. No statement says all that could be said. No prayer fully expresses our faith. No confession brings perfection, no pastoral visit brings holiness. No program accomplishes the Church’s mission. No set of goals and objectives includes everything. This is what we are about. We plant the seeds that one day will grow. We water seeds already planted, knowing that they will hold future promise. We lay foundations that will need further development. We provide yeast that produces effects far beyond our capabilities. We cannot do everything, and there is a sense of liberation in realizing that. This enables us to do something, and to do it very well. It may be incomplete, but it is a beginning, as step along the way, an opportunity for the Lord’s grace to enter and to do the rest. We may never see the end results, but that’s the difference between the master builder and the worker. We are workers, not master builders, ministers, not messiahs. We are prophets of a future not our own.

Archbishop Oscar Romero

***************************** God of justice You open our eyes to the neeeds of our sisters and brothers. Help us to see the Christ in every person and in all of creation so that we live with respect and love for one another. We ask this in the name of your son Jesús Who by his life, death and resurrection, Proclaims the dignity of humanity in every time and place. Amen. Taken from Catholic Social Teaching and Human Rights by Jane Deren, Marissa Maurer and Julie Vieira, Center of Concern, 1998.

22

BIBLIOGRAPHICAL REFERENCES Unit III Battistella, Graziano. “The Protection of the Rights of the Migrants,” Missionarietá Scalabriniana. Roma: Direzione Generale della Congregazione Scalabriniana, 1991. Pp. 245-62. Comisión Episcopal de Pastoral Biblica. Biblia y Derechos Humanos. México, 1999. Crusemann, Frank. “’You Know the Herat of a Stranger’ (Exodus 23:9). A Recollection of the Torah in the Face of New Nationalism and Xenophobia,” Concilium 4 (1993) 95-109. Exteberria, Xabier. El Reto de los Derechos Humanos. Santander: Sal Terrae, 1994. Frades, Eduardo. “Fundamentación Bíblico-teológica de los Derechos Humanos,” http://www.uca.edu.ni/koinonia/relat/113.htm García, Carmelo. Los Derechos Humanos en la Situación Actual del Mundo. Madrid: PPC, 1999. Gimbernat, José Antonio. Los Derechos Humanos. A los Cincuenta Años de la Declaración de 1948. Santander: Sal Terrae, 1998. González Faus, José I. Derechos Humanos, Deberes Míos. Pensamiento Débil, Caridad Fuerte. Santander: Sal Terrae, 1997. Gowan, Donald F. “Wealth and Poverty in the Old Testament. The Case of the Widow, the Orphan and the Sojourner,” Interpretation 41 (1987) 341-53. Hernandez, José Maria. Derechos de los Pobres, Derechos de Dios. México: Ediciones Dabar, 1995. Mieth, Dietmar. ‘Distribucion de Derechos y Deberes. Reflexiones Ético-Sociales,” Concilium 248 (1993) 103-123. Pieris, Aloysius. “Human Rights Language and Liberation Theology,” in Expanding the View. Gustavo Gutiérrez and the Future of Liberation Theology. Eds. Marc H.Ellis and Otto Maduro. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1988. Pp. 157-70. Segundo, Juan Luis. Signs of the Times. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1993. Pp. 53-66. Sobrino, Jon. Liberación con Espíritu. Apuntes para una Nueva Espiritualidad. Santander: Sal Terrae, 1985, pag. 127-140. Translated in English: Spirituality of Liberation. Toward a Political Holiness. Maryknoll: Orbis Books, 1988, pp.103-14.

23

Soares- Prabhu, George M. “Biblia como Magna Carta de los Movimientos en Pro de la Liberacion y los Derechos Humanos,” Concilium 257 (1995) 115-130. See the English version of Concilium. United States Catholic Conference. Who are my Sisters and Brothers? A Catholic Educational Guide for Understanding and Welcoming Immigrants and Refugees. Washington, D.C., 1996. United States Catholic Conference. Who are my Sisters and Brothers? Reflections on Understanding and Welcoming Immigrants and Refugees. Washington, D.C.,1996. Wilfred, Felix. “Human Rights or the Rights of the Poor? Redeeming the Human Rights from

Contemporary Inversions,” Vidyajyoty 62 (1998) 734-752. It can be found also in www.sedos.org/english/Wilfred.html. Traducido y condensado en español: “¿Derechos Humanos o Derechos de los Pobres?,” Selecciones de Teología 39 (2000) 125-134.

El cuaderno de la revista Testimonio numero 175 de septiembre - octubre de 1999 está completamente dedicado al tema de los Derechos Humanos.