Migration

Before judging, social doctrine seeks to understand. The word “migration” covers very different realities, which must be distinguished to avoid faulty reasoning. Confusing an expatriate engineer, a refugee fleeing war, and a rejected asylum seeker leads to unjust conclusions in both directions.

Emigrate, immigrate, flee: what are we talking about?

Migration refers to any long-term movement of a person away from their usual place of residence. We speak of emigration from the perspective of the country of departure, and immigration from the perspective of the country of arrival: these are two sides of the same movement. But the moral and legal status varies according to the cause of departure.

• The economic migrant voluntarily leaves their country to seek work or better living conditions.
• The refugee flees persecution or serious danger (war, violence, disaster): their departure is not truly free, and international law grants them special protection.
• The internally displaced person has had to flee but has not crossed a border: they remain within their country.
• The asylum seeker officially requests protection from a State, awaiting a decision on their status.

The Church refuses to reduce all migration to one of these categories. It reminds us that a refugee is not a criminal, but also that a State has the right to verify the reality of situations; and that the deliberate confusion of categories — whether to open the gates wide or to close them entirely — betrays justice^[7].

An ancient phenomenon made global

Migrations have always existed: invasions, colonizations, great famines, deportations, diasporas. What is new is their scale, their speed, and their global character, intimately linked to the globalization of trade, communications, and inequalities. Never before have so many human beings been on the move simultaneously, and never has the wealth gap between regions of the globe — the primary driver of departures — been so visible and so immediately known to all^[8].

Why the Church takes up the subject

For the Church, reading a social fact as a “sign of the times” means seeking a call from God in it. The Second Vatican Council urges Christians to “scrutinize the signs of the times and interpret them in the light of the Gospel”^[9]. The instruction Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi (2004) applies exactly this perspective to migration: it sees in it both a trial (uprooting, exploitation, suffering of families) and an opportunity (encounter of peoples, new evangelization, expansion of fraternity)^[10]. This is why migration is not only, for the Church, a matter of management: it is a place where the moral quality of a civilization is at stake.

The Church’s concern for migrants is not a novelty of the 21st century. It has been built gradually, from the industrialization and great European emigrations of the 19th century to contemporary migration crises, forming a coherent body of doctrine that successive popes have deepened without ever contradicting.

Scalabrini and the Pastoral Origins

At the end of the 19th century, millions of Europeans — Italians, Irish, Poles — emigrated to the Americas under miserable conditions. Saint John Baptist Scalabrini (1839–1905), bishop of Piacenza, was among the first to organize a specific pastoral care: in 1887 he founded the Missionaries of Saint Charles (Scalabrinians), soon followed by a female branch, to accompany emigrants “wherever they go and whatever their origin”^[11]. In 1912, Saint Pius X established in Rome, at the Consistorial Congregation, an office for the spiritual care of emigrants (motu proprio Cum omnes catholicos, 15 August 1912), the ancestor of the future Pontifical Council^[12]. The social doctrine of migration thus first arose from concrete charity, before being formulated into principles.

Pius XII: Exsul Familia, the “Magna Carta” of Migrants (1952)

In the aftermath of World War II, Europe counted millions of displaced persons. On August 1, 1952, Pius XII promulgated the apostolic constitution Exsul Familia Nazarethana — “the exiled family of Nazareth” — the first major magisterial document entirely devoted to migrants, called their “Magna Carta”^[13]. The title already says it all: the Holy Family fleeing into Egypt becomes the archetype of every refugee family, and Christ himself stands in solidarity with the exile. Drawing on Rerum Novarum, Pius XII grounds the right to emigrate on the universal destination of the goods of the earth: God has destined the created goods for all men, and no one may be confined to misery by the mere borders that men have drawn^[14].

John XXIII: The Right to Emigrate Proclaimed (1963)

It was John XXIII who, in the encyclical Pacem in Terris (April 11, 1963), for the first time elevated the right to emigrate to a human right solemnly declared, at the heart of a catalogue of personal rights:

“Every man has the right to freedom of movement and residence within the political community of which he is a citizen; he also has the right, for valid reasons, to go abroad and settle there. Belonging to this or that political community can never prevent anyone from being […] a citizen of that universal community where all men are gathered by common bonds.” — Saint John XXIII, Pacem in Terris, April 11, 1963, n° 25^[15]

The foundation is clear: beyond his citizenship, every man belongs to the one human family. Yet this right is not unconditional — John XXIII speaks of “valid reasons” — and he calls, in return, for international cooperation so that men need not exile themselves in suffering^[16].

From Vatican II to John Paul II: Work and the “Right Not to Emigrate”

The Second Vatican Council, in Gaudium et Spes (1965), recognizes the economic necessity of migration but denounces the precarious condition of migrant workers, too often treated as mere labor^[17]. Paul VI, in Octogesima Adveniens (May 14, 1971), goes further: it is necessary to “overcome a narrowly nationalist attitude” toward migrants and to recognize a true charter of their rights — right to emigrate, integration, professional promotion, decent housing, family reunification^[18].

John Paul II brings a decisive nuance. In Laborem Exercens (1981), he calls emigration for work a “necessary evil”: necessary because it can be a real good, but evil in that it tears a man from his land, language, and family^[19]. From this arises an affirmation that rebalances the entire doctrine — the right not to emigrate:

“To build concrete conditions of peace, with regard to migrants and refugees, means seriously committing to preserve above all the right not to emigrate, that is, to live in peace and dignity in one’s own country.” — Saint John Paul II, Message for the 90th World Day of Migrants and Refugees 2004, Migrations in a Vision of Peace, December 15, 2003, § 3^[20] This reversal is crucial: the best migration policy is one that makes migration unnecessary by addressing its root causes — war, poverty, injustice, and poor governance.

Erga Migrantes (2004) and Caritas in Veritate (2009)

In 2004, the Pontifical Council for the Pastoral Care of Migrants, with the approval of John Paul II, published the instruction Erga Migrantes Caritas Christi (“The Charity of Christ Toward Migrants”), a true pastoral code that reinterprets the entire phenomenon in the light of Revelation and organizes the Church’s reception of migrants^[21]. Five years later, Benedict XVI devoted a major development on the issue in his social encyclical Caritas in Veritate (2009):

“Every migrant is a human person who, as such, possesses fundamental inalienable rights that must be respected by all and in every circumstance.”
— Benedict XVI, Caritas in Veritate, June 29, 2009, no. 62^[22]

Benedict XVI sees it as a “social phenomenon characteristic of our time” that demands strong and farsighted international cooperation; he recalls that foreign workers are “neither merchandise nor mere labor power”, and that their work enriches both the host country and, through their remittances, their country of origin^[23].

All the Church’s teaching on migration rests on the balance of two rights that must never be separated. Isolating them produces the two ideologies the Church rejects: the borderless utopia on one side, and selfish withdrawal on the other.

The Right to Emigrate and Its Foundation

The first aspect is the right of the person. Because the earth and its goods are destined by God for all men — this is the principle of the universal destination of goods — no one can be condemned to die of hunger or violence where they were born simply because they were born there. When survival or dignity demands it, a person therefore has the right to leave and seek elsewhere what their homeland denies them^[24]. This right flows directly from the dignity of the human person, which precedes all borders.

The Duty to Welcome “As Far as Possible”

Corresponding to this right, for nations that are able, is a duty to welcome — but a measured duty, not an absolute one. The Catechism states this with remarkable precision:

“Better endowed nations are obliged to welcome as far as possible the foreigner in search of security and the vital resources he cannot find in his country of origin.”
— Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 2241^[25]

The phrase “as far as possible” (Latin quoad fieri potest) is decisive: the duty to welcome is real and obligatory, but proportional to the capacities of the host nation. It does not impose unlimited reception.

The Right and Duty of States to Regulate

The second aspect is the right-duty of States. The same paragraph of the Catechism continues immediately:

“Political authorities may, for the sake of the common good for which they are responsible, subject the exercise of the right to immigrate to various juridical conditions, notably to respect for the duties of migrants toward the country of adoption.”
— Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 2241^[26]

The Compendium of the Social Doctrine specifies the framework for this regulation: migratory flows ordered according to criteria of equity and balance, immigrants welcomed as persons and helped to integrate with their families, and respect for the right to family reunification^[27]. The Church therefore does not advocate open borders. Pope Leo XIV, elected in May 2025, explicitly recalled this during the press conference of April 23, 2026, in response to a question on immigration: “Personally, I believe a State has the right to establish rules at its borders. I do not say that everyone must enter without order, sometimes creating [...] situations more unjust than those they left behind.” — while immediately challenging wealthy countries: “What are we doing [...] to change the situation in the poorest countries?”, reminding that migrants are persons who “deserve the respect due to every human being because of their dignity”^[28].

It is precisely on this point — how far to regulate, under what conditions, how to arbitrate? — that the political debate lies, developed in the article What Does the Church Say About Immigration?. Let us retain here the principle: regulation is legitimate, but it is ordered to the common good, never to national selfishness.

The “Right Not to Emigrate” and the Deep Causes

Between these two rights, recent doctrine highlights a third term that transcends both: the right not to have to emigrate. Pope Francis made this one of the pillars of Fratelli Tutti (2020):

“The right not to emigrate, that is, to be able to remain in one’s own land, must be reaffirmed.”
— Pope Francis, Fratelli Tutti, October 3, 2020, no. 38^[29]

No one should be forced to flee. The first justice toward migrants is therefore to combat the causes that drive them onto the roads: wars, persecutions, poverty, corruption, environmental degradation. This is the profound link of migration with peace, development, and integral ecology.

Social doctrine does not grant one-sided rights. It describes a relationship of mutual obligations, where each party — migrant and host society — has duties toward the other. This is what distinguishes it from a mere advocacy.

The Duties of the Migrant

The Catechism is just as clear about the duties of the immigrant as it is about those of nations:

“The immigrant is obliged to respect with gratitude the material and spiritual heritage of the country that welcomes him, to obey its laws, and to contribute to its burdens.”
— Catechism of the Catholic Church, § 2241^[30]

Three specific duties, then: gratitude toward the material and spiritual heritage of the host country (its culture, faith, institutions), obedience to the laws, and contribution to common burdens (work, taxes, participation). Erga Migrantes speaks of a “responsible and loyal” contribution to the development of the host country^[31]. Integration is not a favor granted to the migrant: it is also a moral requirement incumbent upon him.

The Duties of the Host Society

Conversely, the host society must do more than merely tolerate: it must recognize the migrant as a person, not as a threat or a commodity. This implies just working conditions (cf. just wage), respect for dignity, protection against exploitation and trafficking, access to fundamental rights, and concern for the migrant’s family, notably through family reunification^[32]. The greatest injustice would be to use immigrant labor while denying the rights attached to the person.

Integration, a Two-Way Process

True integration is neither assimilation that erases all difference, nor the multiculturalism of mere coexistence that creates parallel societies. Francis describes it as a “two-way process”: the migrant respects and adopts the culture that welcomes him, and the host society is enriched by what the migrant brings, in an exchange ordered toward the common good^[33]. It is a work of patience involving both parties.

While migration is not itself a principle, it is a privileged field of application for the four permanent principles of social doctrine, which mutually illuminate one another when applied to it.

The dignity of the person forbids ever reducing the migrant to a number, a cost, or a threat: he is “a human person who possesses inalienable fundamental rights”^[34]. The common good, applied to migration, takes on a universal dimension: it does not stop at national borders, for there is also a common good of the entire human family^[35]. Subsidiarity reminds us that reception is not only the business of states: it primarily mobilizes families, parishes, associations, local communities — the whole fabric of intermediate bodies, closer and often more humane. Finally, solidarity expresses the conviction that “we are all really responsible for all”^[36]: global interdependence, which circulates goods and capital, must also generate responsibility toward the people it moves.

It is the articulation of these principles that produces the Catholic balance: without dignity, regulation becomes inhuman; without the common good, reception becomes irresponsible; without subsidiarity, everything rests on a powerless state; without solidarity, everyone withdraws into themselves.

Pope Francis, whose pontificate has made migration a priority—from the cry of Lampedusa against the “globalization of indifference” (July 8, 2013) to Fratelli Tutti—summarized the Christian response in four verbs that have become the reference pastoral framework:

“Our common response could be articulated around four verbs based on the principles of the Church’s doctrine: welcome, protect, promote, and integrate.”
— Pope Francis, Message for the World Day of Migrants and Refugees 2018, reiterated in Fratelli Tutti no. 129^[37]

• Welcome: open safe and legal pathways, expand opportunities for regular entry rather than allowing clandestine networks to flourish.
• Protect: defend the rights and dignity of migrants, especially the most vulnerable, against exploitation and human trafficking.
• Promote: foster the integral development of the migrant person and their community, both in the host country and in the country of origin.
• Integrate: enable full and reciprocal participation in the life of society, with mutual respect.

These verbs do not constitute a precise political program—the Church does not propose one—but rather moral guidelines that each society is invited to prudently interpret according to its means, which again refers to the political prudence developed in What does the Church say about immigration? and to political charity.

The Church’s position is often caricatured, both from the right and the left. Three objections recur constantly; examining them allows us to see how much more balanced the actual doctrine is than its imitations.

“The Church wants open borders”

This is the most widespread—and the most false—objection. As we have just seen: the Catechism explicitly recognizes the right of States to “subject the exercise of the right to immigrate to various juridical conditions” for the sake of the common good^[38], and Pope Leo XIII affirms that a State “has the right to establish rules at its borders”^[39]. The Church does not call for the abolition of borders: it calls for them to be managed with justice and humanity, serving the person and the common good, not out of fear or calculation.

“Is welcoming everyone realistic?”

The Church does not ask to “welcome everyone” either. The phrase “as far as possible” in the Catechism explicitly places proportion at the heart of the duty to welcome^[40]: regulating flows according to criteria of equity and balance is a condition of the dignity of welcome^[41]. Charity does not abolish political prudence: it demands it.

“What about Europe’s Christian identity?”

Concern for the Christian heritage is legitimate, but the Church’s response is not withdrawal. On the one hand, it reminds us that the migrant’s duty includes respect for the spiritual patrimony of the host country^[42]: integration presupposes that the Christian soul of a nation is not erased. On the other hand, it observes that welcoming migrants can rekindle faith in secularized societies, and that the best defense of a Christian identity is not closure but the witness of lived charity^[43]. Fear has never evangelized anyone.

Beyond social analysis, migration touches the very heart of Christian faith. The entire Bible is traversed by figures of migrants: Abraham called to leave his country^[44], Israel enslaved and then a foreigner in Egypt, the people journeying through the desert toward the Promised Land, the exile in Babylon. It is on this memory that the repeated commandment to love the stranger is founded: “Love the immigrant, therefore, for in the land of Egypt you were immigrants”^[45]. This biblical dimension of hospitality is further developed in the article Welcoming the Stranger.

Christ himself experienced exile: as a child, he had to flee with Mary and Joseph from Herod’s persecution^[46]—this is the full meaning of the title Exsul Familia chosen by Pius XII. And the Church understands itself as a pilgrim people, without a permanent dwelling here below:

“For here we have no lasting city, but we seek the city that is to come.”
— Letter to the Hebrews 13:14^[47]

In this sense, every Christian is a homo viator, a traveler toward the heavenly homeland. The migrant who knocks at our door is thus, mysteriously, an image of our own condition—and Christ warned that it is in him that he presents himself: “I was a stranger and you welcomed me”^[48].

This truth reaches its summit in the spirituality of the Divine Will transmitted to Luisa Piccarreta (1865–1947): the soul who lives in the divine Fiat never acts for itself alone, but “in the name of all,” embracing in the single Will of God all men, both settled and exiled. The fraternity that social doctrine calls for in the order of structures finds here its inner root: the communion of all in the one Will of the Father^[49].

• What Does the Church Say About Immigration? — the practical debate on migration policy, “neither lax nor xenophobic.”
• Welcoming the Stranger — the biblical and spiritual dimension of hospitality.
• The Dignity of the Human Person — the foundation: we welcome persons, never a mass.
• The Common Good — the end toward which migration regulation is ordered.
• The Universal Destination of Goods — the foundation of the right to emigrate.
• Solidarity — global interdependence to be transformed into responsibility.
• Subsidiarity — the role of families, parishes, and intermediate bodies in welcoming.
• Globalization — the background of contemporary migration phenomena.
• Poverty — one of the primary causes of forced departures.
• Peace and Integral Ecology — combating the roots of forced migration.