There are a number of issue on the table here. Let’s try to look at them in small pieces. I have to add a disclaimer here. We cannot do them justice on an Internet thread. If you want to know how to apply the CCC and Evangelium Vitae, go with your bishop. As Paul reminds the Churches under him, he has been given to them as their father, because he is an Apostle. According to the same tradition, our bishop is given to us as our father. It falls within his authority to interpret and apply these teachings for us. The key here is to go with the bishop of your diocese.
Another issue on the table is the attempt to interpret what Pope John Paul II was thinking. This is a very Protestant notion. The Protestants do this all the time with scriptures. Every individual feels empowered to interpret them without a central authority to confirm or deny. When you do this to the writings of a pope, you fall into the same practice. There are systems and authorities in the Church who have been authorized to interpret these writings. We must work with those.
Are there situations when deportation is morally acceptable? One has to follow the rule of the greater good. An action can be morally acceptable if it is for the greater good, provided that the action is not already condemned as immoral in itself. Since Pope John Paul does not say that deportation is immoral here, but not there, we would be guessing. St. Augustine always tells us that in doubt, you go with what the Church says as she says it. In this case, until another pope comes around and says, “Deportation is moral here, but not here . . . “ we take the words of John Paul as they are written, because they are written authoritatively and definitively. No pope can delete them. He can explain them or change how they are applied, not do away with them. Until the Church says that you can apply it this way in this situation and that way in the other, you always take it at face value. You don’t want to run the risk of doing the wrong thimg.
Also on the table is the issue of faith. I don’t always understand things. Some things sound foolish to me. Other things I just think are just bad ideas. However, the law in Christian spirituality was very clearly spelled out by St. Benedict, repeated by St. Francis of Assisi and explained by St. Thomas Aquinas. I left a few other saints out in the middle. We must obey, even when we are in disagreement. The only time when it is permissible to disobey and even a duty to disobey, is when we are asked to commit a sin. However, who decides what is a sin? The Church does. Therefore, I cannot unilaterally decide that this is a sin just to get out of obeying, when the Church has never said so. In that case, my agenda becomes very obvious. I’m invoking conscience in order to liberate myself from moral duty. I cannot do that. I must obey, even if I’m uncomfortable, until it is certain that what I’m being asked to obey is morally wrong. They I have a duty to disobey.
There is the all important issue of the house divided. Here is where American Catholics seem to be the greatest sinners. Pope John Paul once said that to American Catholics while he was visiting Baltimore. I was there when he said that Americans often create a tension between their fidelity to their nation and their fidelity to their Church. It was rather interesting, because this is one area where he found that Muslims had something to teach American Catholics. They never tolerate state before faith. They force their state to comply with their faith or their faith drives their politics. If we who have been given the fullness truth were to do that, how much better would our nation be?
Finally, I am feeling preasured here to commit a very grave sin that I will not commit. When my religious community was granted permission to separate from the larger Franciscan community, it was for one reason and one reason only. We were to continue to live the Rule of St. Francis, as every other Franciscan. But we were to focus all of our energy into proclaiming Evangelium Vitae and all of its aspects and consequences. In essence, we then had the Rule of St. Francis to govern our spiritual lives and Evangelium Vitae as our ministry. We literally spend hours and weeks studying this document under a microscope, referring back and forth between the document and it’s sources. John Paul II used over 200 sources to write this document. We are neither ignorant of the content or of its grounding in Catholic tradition, Catholic moral law, natural law, and Catholic social teaching. For me to back down and say, “Yes you can interpret it your way or to say that I support our current immigration laws, without challenging the flaws in it that are contrary to our Catholic teachings, would be a very grave sin.”
You may question my formation. You may question my charity. But you may never question my integrity and my fidelity to St. Francis and the Church. Because you will see me die saying the same thing, “Do as he tells you to do.”
If this kind of obedience to the Holy Rule, which says, “The brothers shall obey the pope in all things, but sin and shall teach the laity to do the same,” is bothersome to some and questionable to others, then I challenge you to reflect on your own commitment to the Catholic Church. You cannot ask the Church, her clergy and her religious to be faithful to their call on your terms. You take us on the terms of our founders and the terms of the Church or you leave us. There is no compromise when it comes to obedience and fidelity to what I promised to obey. You have been asking for priests and religious who do not compromise on their calling. Here I am, your brother.
Fraternally,
Br. JR, OSF
Please clarify the following for me…
But, please, in keeping with the thread - what does this mean specific to deportation? And, give you give a citation or reference? Thanks 
) why would we need to have this in context of other docuemnts? This seems to me to mean that the condemnation has some exceptions. You see, where clear direction is needed. Looking forward to hearing from you! 
