Do illegal immigrants sin mortally by living a lie?

Status
Not open for further replies.

HomeschoolDad

Moderator
Staff member
I understand that many illegal immigrants, who have gotten into this country unlawfully, often at risk to their lives and those of their families, find themselves in a situation where they have to “live a lie” — using fake or stolen social security numbers, forged documents, lying about their immigration status, not paying taxes lest they betray their illegal status, and so on. People who risk their lives to get to the US do not make such a decision lightly, sometimes it is their only choice in life.

Do these people ever sin mortally in so doing? It is true that they have to tell lies to keep from being discovered, and they have to keep telling these lies and are unable to promise that they will stop telling them. Are these lies so grave as to constitute one of the three conditions for mortal sin? They are fully aware of what they are doing, but they do not want to tell these lies — given the choice, they’d rather not, but they do not have this choice, short of leaving the country and returning home. Sometimes they have established new lives here — purchased homes, raised their families, perhaps even having gotten married and so on.

It is very easy to argue that the laws are unjust, that they should be able to get visas to be here legally without fear of being deported. We do need the workers, to do jobs that Americans don’t want to do, and their labor enhances the quality of life of all Americans, and makes our country wealthier. They contribute substantially to our country, and we would have real problems if they weren’t here to do the work (agricultural work, construction, housekeeping, poultry processing, landscaping, etc.). A case can also be made that certain territories (the states of the southwestern US) were taken from Mexico unjustly, and that they are doing no more than violating immigration laws that shouldn’t even exist in the first place, if they have settled in these territories — basically, you could argue, they are in Mexican territory under American occupation. We are not the only country that has occupied foreign territory and made it their own, sometimes with “ethnic cleansing” — Pomerania, Silesia, and Prussia incorporated into Poland, eastern Polish territories incorporated into the USSR, and so on.

Even if the sins are venial (taking into account the fact that they are acting under duress by having to lie, or that the lies do not rise to the level of objectively grave sin), I dislike the idea of someone going to confession and saying, in effect, I repent of all my mortal sins, but there are certain venial sins that I have to keep committing, and I cannot resolve to stop them. But that is easy for me to sit back and say, in that I am a US citizen living a comfortable life, and not having to commit continuous venial sins to keep my life from falling apart, and the lives of those I care about.
 
Yes? You can proclaim someone, anyone, guilty of Mortal Sin?

I would say judgment is left to the Lord.

If a person entered the country in fear of their lives, had they remained in their homeland, did they willingly commit a sin? If a person entered the country for any reason, do we know with absolute certainty that that person knew they were committing a sin?

Is immigration even grave matter?

Mortal sin requires grave matter, willful knowledge, and full consent.

This is why only the Lord can determine whether the salvation of an individual has been placed in jeopardy (my the commission of Mortal Sin). I can’t, you can’t, none of us can…except the Lord!

Be at peace!
 
Yes
10 characters
I have a difficult time thinking that Pope Francis, of all people, would take such a stance.

If I were a confessor, I think I would advise the penitent that these lies are arguably not gravely sinful in themselves, and encourage them to pray that they will eventually be in a situation where they don’t have to deal with the scenario. I know this flirts with “end justifies the means” territory, but I couldn’t neglect the fact that it would also be evil to come out of the shadows and destroy your family’s life and welfare in the process. Again, it is easy for me to sit back on my high horses and “bind up burdens too heavy to be borne, and not lift a finger to carry them myself”.

I’d like to see a situation where illegal immigrants could submit themselves for documentation with no questions asked, and be put on the track to permanent residency or citizenship — give them a real SSN, enable them to pay taxes without fear of deportation, and regularize their status.
 
Yes? You can proclaim someone, anyone, guilty of Mortal Sin?

I would say judgment is left to the Lord.

If a person entered the country in fear of their lives, had they remained in their homeland, did they willingly commit a sin? If a person entered the country for any reason, do we know with absolute certainty that that person knew they were committing a sin?

Is immigration even grave matter?

Mortal sin requires grave matter, willful knowledge, and full consent.

This is why only the Lord can determine whether the salvation of an individual has been placed in jeopardy (my the commission of Mortal Sin). I can’t, you can’t, none of us can…except the Lord!

Be at peace!
I don’t presume to judge them, or anyone else, guilty of mortal sin. I would make every excuse for them that I possibly could. This would not include criminals, gangsters, or drug dealers. I’d arrest and imprison them in a skinny minute (and leave their souls in the Hands of God). I’m referring to good, honest, hard-working people who need to be left alone to build better lives.
 
Mark 12:17

“And Jesus answering, said to them: Render therefore to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, and to God the things that are God’s. And they marvelled at him.”

We must obey Just Laws. That includes the Immigration Laws of a specific country.
 
I would say in most cases that no, it is not mortally sinful.
I’d like to see a situation where illegal immigrants could submit themselves for documentation with no questions asked, and be put on the track to permanent residency or citizenship — give them a real SSN, enable them to pay taxes without fear of deportation, and regularize their status.
Me too. I see only three main solutions to our current immigration problem:
  1. Deport 12 million+ people.
  2. Find a way to regularize their status.
  3. Do nothing.
Is option one really viable, economical, or even moral? I don’t believe so. Doing nothing doesn’t solve anything either. So I think the only viable option is to find a way to regularize their status. Whether through a path to citizenship or by permanent residency. Then, they can transition into society smoothly, start paying taxes, etc. In the end, I believe this would help the economy.
 
Last edited:
What we oughta do is just have a policy of allowing anyone come here that wants to, but:

Citizenship is closed off. Only the children of citizens can be citizens. No naturalization process. No birth right citizenship.

Give a permanent residency status to everyone here.

Revoke citizenship for the descendants of anyone who came here illegally post 1980.

Then we can be as open as can be without letting foreigners influence our elections
I agree with most of what you said except for ending birthright citizenship, and especially revoking the citizenship of those already here.

I say we give permanent residency to all who are currently here. Only deport someone if they commit a felony. Then, make applying for citizenship much easier for those who seek to immigrate here legally. Keep in mind, unless you’re full-blooded Native American, everybody is either an immigrant or descended from immigrants at one one or another, so I don’t believe in closing off citizenship.

Or, if you want to allow permanent residency but close off citizenship to immigrants, at least give children of permanent residents birthright citizenship.
 
Last edited:
We can’t rely on immigration for population growth, letting people born of foreign nationals dictate the direction of our nation is suicide.
I mean, that’s how we did it in the 1800’s- Catholics from Ireland and Germany, and then later Italy and Poland, created a huge increase in population. We survived then. What is different now?

Children and grandchildren of immigrants quickly begin to assimilate into American life. I’ve definitely seen it firsthand with hispanic immigrants.
 
Last edited:
I could maybe get behind allowing the great grandchildren of immigrants to apply for citizenship.
Better than nothing, I guess. But as I said, I don’t think it takes that many generations for immigrant families to assimilate.
 
Acceptable is a broad term. I would say not entirely acceptable but having mitigating circumstances. I think this may be in accord with Catholic teaching.
 
This isn’t the 19th century anymore. We don’t have vast swaths of unsettled country anymore to hand out farmland.

Our mass immigration strategy is why we have a stagnation in wages for American workers. Too much labor not enough demand.
But you said yourself that you support mass migration, just as long as they are only permanent residents and never become citizens.

In the 1800s, a large part of immigrants (especially the Irish) went to work in the cities, not farmland.
 
And we must also help the stranger in need. I don’t believe Jesus qualified this regarding their social status. It is likewise an essential tenet of Judaism, for Jews too were strangers in a new land.
 
Last edited:
You are misrepresenting how it works. Yes you can steal food ONLY if there are no other options and it is the only way to stop from dying. Next your are REQUIRED to pay back to whom you stole it from and your stealing it can not bring about harm from which you stole. You can not cause starvation to another person.
 
Since this country is so blessed with resources, I assume that God is substituting Godless citizens with God-fearing Hispanics.
 
@Anrakyr

The basis upon which it is permitted to take food which belongs to another is that of the charity the other ought to be showing.

So, even if I were starving, it would not be right for me to take the only food keeping someone else from starving.

But it would be all right for me to take some food belonging to someone who has enough food because he ought to be willing to share with a starving person.

For example, a plane crashed in the mountains and the lone survivor comes upon an empty vacation home. If the owner were there, he would be obliged to help the survivor; hence, the survivor can avail himself of what he would need to survive, which the owner would be obliged to give him.

To pay back is not strictly necessary, any more than charity received directly is a debt. However, if the person is able to, that would be very nice.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top