CatholicVote published an explosive address by the late Cardinal Giacomo Biffi Feb. 4 in which the then-archbishop of Bologna made a case for giving preference to Catholic migrants and argued Muslim immigrants would not assimilate as well. The cardinal also predicted that the future of Europe would be either Catholic or Muslim.
The address, translated by CatholicVote and originally delivered by Cardinal Biffi in 2000 before members of the Italian Bishops’ Conference’s Migrantes Foundation, argues that secular officials should regulate migration with an eye to maintaining and defending “the distinctive identity of the nation.”
Officials should pursue that mission, Cardinal Biffi also argued, despite the criticism of those who evoke “the specters of racism” and “xenophobia,” even if Catholic clergy are among such critics.
Seriousness of the issue
Cardinal Biffi said at the beginning of his address that “the question of immigration” was vitally important to address and lamented the “undeniable” fact that it had been “so far evaluated and addressed” with “inadequate pastoral attention” and a “lack of realism.”
The cardinal warned against both anti-immigrant “alarmism” and the “anxious trivializations or hopeful minimizations” offered by those who downplay the potential threats of mass migration.
“A historical challenge of this magnitude requires a response — as in the face of all unforeseen and inevitable events of the human experience — without panic and without superficiality,” he said of the migration crisis. “Its causes must be studied; the complex nature of the fact must be meticulously investigated. But we cannot linger too long in research and analyses without ever arriving at some concrete and, as much as is possible, efficacious measures, because the disruptions and hardships generated by immigration are already in motion.”
The Italian government, he said, remained “disoriented,” having been “caught by surprise” by dramatic new rates of immigration.
“Christian communities too were taken by surprise,” he observed, praising Christian leaders’ emphasis on charitable generosity toward immigrants but also critiquing their efforts as “more generous than useful when they fail to reckon with the complexity of the problem and the harshness of reality.”
Apostolic motivation
Cardinal Biffi said his address was motivated by his apostolic concern for his flock and by hope arising “from the reflection and heart of a bishop.” As an Italian citizen and an archbishop, he suggested he viewed himself as one of those who “feel responsible for the present and the future of Christ’s flock entrusted to them.”
“And, also,” he added, “we cannot forget that haunting question left unanswered by the Lord Jesus: ‘When the Son of Man comes, will he find faith on earth?’ (Lk 18:8)”
Cardinal Biffi went on to emphasize the human dignity and inalienable rights of every human being, including immigrants.
“But from this it cannot be deduced — if we wish to be truly ‘secular,’ free of all ideological imperatives — that a nation does not have the right to regulate the influx of those who wish at any cost to enter,” he said. “Still less can it be concluded that it has a duty to open its borders indiscriminately.”
Rather, “every hoped-for project of peaceful integration presupposes and demands that access be monitored and regulated,” he explained. “Everyone can see that arbitrary entry — when it becomes known to be easily attainable enough — gives rise to the uncontrolled spread of poverty and desperation (and sometimes to violent reactions of intolerance and outright rejection), while simultaneously fostering a criminal industry of exploitation that aspires to cross borders in a clandestine manner.”
To avoid such outcomes, government officials have a duty to come up with concrete solutions “aimed at the true good of all, newcomers and our populations alike,” he said.
Immigrants must understand as soon as they enter the adoptive country “what will be asked of them as a necessary counterpart to hospitality,” he went on. “Otherwise, such situations will inevitably provoke pernicious crises of rejection, blind attitudes of xenophobia, and the insurgence of deplorable racial intolerances.” He also decried the “folly” and “cultural terrorism” of policies that had used immigrants to “remedy the egotistical and foolish low birth rate” in Italy.
Mass immigration as threat to national identity
“A consistent influx of foreigners onto our peninsula is acceptable and may even be beneficial, provided there is a serious effort to safeguard the distinctive identity of the nation,” Cardinal Biffi stated.
“Italy is not a deserted or semi-uninhabited land, without history, without living and vital traditions, without a recognizable cultural and spiritual identity, to be populated indiscriminately as though there were no heritage of humanism and civilization that must not be lost,” he explained. Therefore a “genuinely ‘secular’ State” that aims for “the true good” of its citizens (rather than for “the triumph of some ideology”) must promote “the peaceful integration” of immigrants.
At “the very least,” the government should aim for “a non-conflictual coexistence; a co-presence and a coexistence that do not lead to the loss of our wealth of ideals or the denaturing of our specific identity.”
Cardinal Biffi argued that for that legitimate purpose, the government must “concretely ensure that those intending to settle permanently among us undergo an ‘inculturation’ into the spiritual, moral, and juridical reality of our country.” Further, they should be “placed in the condition of knowing the literary, aesthetic, and religious patrimony of the particular humanity that they have come to be a part of.”
Distinguishing between immigrant groups
Immigrants do not all have “equally favorable conditions for integration,” however.
Realistically, public officials should give preference to “Catholic or at least broadly Christian populations, whose integration is easier (for example, Latin Americans, Filipinos, Eritreans, many Eastern Europeans, etc),” the cardinal said. “Asian populations (such as Chinese and Koreans), who have shown noteworthy capacity to integrate with facility while preserving the distinctive elements of their own culture,” could be considered second.
Cardinal Biffi stressed that this method of giving preference to immigrants based on cultural assimilability would be “secularly” motivated and not based on any discriminatory ideology. Public officials who pursue this approach should not be “discouraged even by possible criticisms that arise from the ecclesiastical area or by Catholic organizations,” he said.
“As you can see, what is proposed here is simply the ‘criteria for easiest and least costly integration,’” he said, again emphasizing that it his suggested criteria are “totally and explicitly ‘secular.’”
“[E]voking the specters of racism, xenophobia, religious discrimination, clerical interference, or even constitutional violation would be a truly astonishing and singular misunderstanding,” he added, “which if it were to occur, would insinuate some doubt as to the perspicacity of the opinionmakers and Italian politicians.”
Muslim immigrants
Cardinal Biffi went on to argue that “the case of the Muslims must be treated on its own” and that “those responsible for public matters” should “not fear confronting it with their eyes open and without illusions.”
“Muslims — in their great majority and with some exceptions — arrive among us intending to remain, individually and collectively, extraneous to our ‘humanity’ in what is most essential, most precious, most ‘secularly’ indispensable,” he explained: “more or less explicitly, they come to us well decided to remain substantially ‘different,’ in the expectation of making all of us substantially like them.”
Cardinal Biffi said that Muslims in their own nations have different food, “a different day off, a right to a family incompatible with ours,” and “a conception of the woman very distant from ours (to the point of practicing polygamy).”
“Above all,” he continued, “they have a rigorously integralist vision of public life, as the perfect identification between religion and politics as part of their indubitable and undeniable faith, even though they wait prudently before showing it to be preponderant. It is not then the men of the Church, but the modern Western States that must come to terms with this.”
The Italian political order, he said, “seriously believes in the importance of civil liberties (among them religious liberty) and in democratic principles.” But in Muslim countries, Christians have their rights strictly curtailed by authorities.
“As much as it may seem outside of our mentality and even paradoxical,” he concluded, “the only efficacious and realistic way of promoting the ‘principle of reciprocity’ on behalf of a truly ‘secular’ State truly interested in the spreading of human liberties, would be to allow for Muslims in Italy, in terms of institutions to be authorized, only what Muslim countries effectively allow others.”
Italy’s Catholicism and non-Christian immigrants
Cardinal Biffi also pointed out that mass migration had led to more religious diversity in Italy. In addressing that fact, officials should remember that while Catholicism was no longer the “official state religion” of Italy, it “remains nonetheless the ‘historical religion’ of the Italian nation, the particular source of its identity, the determinant inspiration of our greatest achievements.”
It would be “completely improper” to compare Catholicism with other religious traditions in Italy to the point of bringing about “an unnatural leveling or even an annihilation of the highest values of our civilization,” he said.
It is the duty of every Christian to make the Gospel known, he went on. That mission “can be assisted but cannot be replaced by social aid that we are able to offer our brothers,” and the state must never in any way discourage Christian evangelism on the part of its native-born citizens when directed at non-Christian immigrants.
“The Lord did not say, ‘Except Muslims, or Jews, or the Dalai Lama,’” the cardinal said. “Whoever undermines the legitimacy or the opportunity of this limitless and non-negotiable proclamation commits the sin of intolerance against us: It would prohibit us from being what we are, that is, ‘Christians,’ obedient to the clear and explicit will of Christ.”
Catholic immigrants
Cardinal Biffi said Catholics in Italy must make clear to Catholic immigrants — “whatever their language or skin color” — that “within the Church there are no ‘foreigners.’” Catholic immigrant communities “should be encouraged to preserve their own typical Catholic traditions, which will be the object of affectionate attention by all. The co-presence of these diverse ‘forms’ of ecclesial life and genuine worship will doubtlessly constitute a spiritual enrichment for all of Christianity.”
A similar regard should be given to Eastern Christian communities not in communion with Rome, albeit with an understanding of real credal differences.
“The faithful of other, non-Christian religions” must be “loved” and helped, he went on. “From some of them — particularly from Muslims — we can all learn fidelity to their ritual exercises and to their moments of prayer, but it is not our task to offer positive collaborations for their religious practice.”
Nonetheless, Cardinal Biffi said, citing an earlier document published by the Italian Bishops’ Conference: “The Christian communities … must not offer for religious encounters of non-Christian faiths churches, chapels, and spaces reserved for Catholic worship, as also areas destined for parochial activities.”
Will Europe remain Christian?
Cardinal Biffi recalled being asked the question: “Do you also believe that Europe will either be Christian or it will not be?”
He answered that “Europe will either become Christian again, or it will become Muslim. What appears to me without a future is the ‘culture of nothingness,’ of liberty without limits and without content, of skepticism celebrated as intellectual conquest — which seems to be the largely dominant attitude in the European nations, more or less all wealthy in means and poor in truth.”
“This ‘culture of nothingess,’” he continued, “(supported by hedonism and by libertarian insatiability) will not be able to stand up to the ideological assault of Islam, which will not be lacking. Only the rediscovery of the Christian event as the sole salvation of man — and so only a decisive resurrection of the ancient soul of Europe — will be able to offer a different outcome to this inevitable confrontation.”
The cardinal said neither Catholics nor secularists had yet recognized that unfolding drama.
“Secularists hold the Church hostage in all ways without realizing that they are fighting the strongest inspirer and most valid defender of Western civilization and its values of rationalism and freedom,” he said. “They might realize it too late.”
Catholics, on the other hand, “letting the knowledge of the truth they possess fade and substituting apostolic anxiety with the pure and simple dialogue at all costs, unconsciously prepare themselves (humanly speaking) for their own extinction,” he argued. “The hope is that the gravity of the situation might at a certain moment lead to an efficacious reawakening of both reason and the ancient faith.”
“This is our hope, our task, our prayer,” he concluded.
Readers can find the full address posted on the CatholicVote website here.