Archbishop Wester’s Migration Comments Undermine Christ’s Social Kingship
EWTN News reports a dispute between Santa Fe “Archbishop” John Wester and House Speaker Mike Johnson regarding migration policies, where both parties demonstrate theological confusion antithetical to Catholic tradition. The “archbishop” condemns Johnson’s defense of border enforcement while promoting modernist distortions of Scripture.
Subversion of Divine Authority in Civil Governance
The exchange reveals a fundamental rejection of Quas Primas (Pius XI, 1925), which declares Christ’s kingship over all nations: “He must reign in our minds… our wills… our hearts… the bodies and members.” Johnson’s claim that Romans 13 grants civil authorities divine right to regulate borders while exempting them from Christ’s moral law constitutes semi-Pelagian error. The speaker ignores Pius XI’s teaching that rulers must “publicly honor and obey” Christ, with civil laws ordered to “God’s commandments and Christian principles.”
Wester compounds this error by asserting that border regulation “is never absolute” while neglecting to cite the Church’s perennial teaching that states must subordinate immigration policies to the salvation of souls. Both men treat migration as a purely natural phenomenon, ignoring St. Augustine’s principle that true peace comes only through ordered submission to Christ the King (De Civitate Dei, XIX.13).
Scripture Weaponized for Political Agendas
Johnson’s attempt to limit Matthew 25:35 to individual action constitutes a radical departure from papal teaching. Leo XIII condemned such privatization of faith in Libertas (1888): “The Church… cannot approve… that each one should, according to his own fancy, render or not render account to God.” Wester responds not with doctrine but sentimentalism, decrying “theological language” used to “diminish dignity” while himself reducing the Gospel to “compassion” detached from the lex credendi.
The “archbishop’s” statement that “strong policies and humane treatment are not mutually exclusive” echoes the modernist synthesis condemned in Pascendi (Pius X, 1907), which seeks to reconcile truth with error. His appeal to the post-conciliar “Catechism” holds no weight against Pius XII’s teaching in Exsul Familia (1952) that migration rights exist only when “public wealth permits and higher interests” allow – a hierarchy of goods Wester inverts.
Omission of Supernatural Finality
Both figures exhibit naturalism by discussing migration without reference to:
- The duty of Catholic rulers to facilitate missionary work (Syllabus of Errors, Pius IX, Prop. 77)
- The Church’s right to free access to migrants for evangelization (Quas Primas)
- The eternal consequences of importing heresy or paganism (Pius V, Quo Primum)
Wester’s silence on the primacy of spiritual goods reveals conciliarism’s poisonous fruit. The 1917 Code of Canon Law (Canon 1350) mandated that Catholic immigrants have access to priests of their rite, a sacramental priority replaced by Wester with vague calls for “humane solutions.”
False Opposition Between Law and Charity
The “archbishop” creates a modernist dichotomy foreign to pre-conciliar magisterium. Pius XII taught in Summi Pontificatus (1939) that “charity cannot take the place of justice unfairly withheld,” requiring both secure borders and provision for legitimate refugees. Wester’s claim that society has “obligations” to strangers ignores the Thomistic principle that general justice binds citizens to their proper common good (ST II-II Q58 A6), not undefined global responsibilities.
Johnson’s assimilationist rhetoric equally distorts Catholic principles. St. Thomas More’s martyrdom proves that migrants must never be required to adopt unjust laws (Syllabus, Prop. 39). True assimilation means conversion to Christ the King, not cultural homogenization.
Ecclesiological Deviance
Wester cites the USCCB’s 216-5 vote against deportations as authoritative, despite Vatican I’s condemnation of episcopal conferences overriding papal authority (Session 3). The “pope” he defends – the antipope Leo XIV – lacks all jurisdiction, making his migration comments irrelevant to Catholic policy. Authentic Church teaching remains in Pius XII’s 1958 documents, which neither figure references.
The EWTN poll showing 54% of Catholics support deportations demonstrates the conciliar sect’s catechetical failure. True Catholics would judge migration through the lens of Quas Primas: “When men… do not refuse to submit to Christ’s rule, society will at last receive great blessings.”
Conclusion: Rejecting the Neo-Church’s False Mercy
This dispute between two non-Catholics (a conciliar sect prelate and a Baptist politician) illustrates the total victory of naturalism in public discourse. Where St. Pius X would have demanded both men swear the Oath Against Modernism, we find only competing humanitarianisms detached from the Regnum Christi. The solution lies not in policy debates but restoration of the Social Kingship through consecration of nations to Christ the King – anathema to both Johnson’s nationalism and Wester’s globalism.
Source:
Archbishop Wester warns House speaker against using Scripture to undermine human dignity (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 09.02.2026