US-Hungarian Symposium Capitulates to Naturalism on Migration Crisis
EWTN News portal reports on a February 4, 2026 symposium titled “The Crisis of Migration for Families and Nations” hosted at the Hungarian Embassy in Washington, D.C. The event featured commentary on a Budapest think tank paper advocating “balance” between Christian compassion and state interests regarding mass migration. Panelists including Catholic University professor Chad Pecknold endorsed claims that mass deportations may be “legitimate,” while criticizing the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops’ (USCCB) opposition to mass deportations as contrary to “common good” considerations.
Naturalism Masquerading as Christian Ethics
The Axioma Center’s paper purports to establish “axioms of a Christian migration policy” yet reduces Christian ethics to utilitarian calculations. Its claim that “national security, cultural and moral traditions… are all essential components of what constitutes the common good” inverts the hierarchy of values. Pius XI’s encyclical Quas Primas establishes that “the peace of Christ can only be found in the Kingdom of Christ” (QP §1), making the Social Reign of Christ the King the sine qua non of true common good. By omitting this fundamental principle, the symposium reduces morality to pagan statecraft.
“Christians have to take some of these principles and think outside of the bounds of liberalism,” [Pecknold] said.
This admission reveals the bankruptcy of the panel’s approach. St. Pius X condemned in Lamentabili the error that “Truth changes with man” (Proposition 58). Authentic Catholic action requires not mere “thinking outside liberalism” but total rejection of Enlightenment frameworks. Pecknold’s Thomistic reference ignores Aquinas’ insistence that “the faithful of Christ are called by the Apostle ‘kings’ because they are united to the Eternal King” (Summa Contra Gentiles IV, 76) – establishing theocratic governance as the only legitimate political order.
USCCB’s Heretical Posture Exposes Conciliar Apostasy
The article notes the USCCB’s 216-5 vote condemning mass deportations in November 2025. This conciliar sect’s position constitutes formal heresy against:
- The Syllabus of Errors’ condemnation of those who claim “the Church ought to be separated from the State, and the State from the Church” (Proposition 55)
- Pius IX’s teaching that “the eternal law commands that the natural order be maintained” (Quanta Cura §3), requiring states to preserve homogeneous Catholic populations
EWTN’s framing presents the USCCB’s stance as merely “differing” rather than recognizing it as apostasy from Catholic doctrine. The 1983 Code of Canon Law (Canon 1366) invoked by the conciliar sect holds no authority against pre-1958 teaching that nations must “recognize the right of the Church to judge matters of faith and morals” (Syllabus, Proposition 19).
Omission of Supernatural Finality Condemns Symposium
The entire discussion ignores the primary purpose of migration policy: the salvation of souls. Panelists reduce concerns to:
- Economic impacts (“cheap labor taking jobs”)
- Cultural preservation (“salad bowl vs melting pot”)
- Bureaucratic considerations (“rule of law”)
This naturalism constitutes implicit denial of the Church’s missionary mandate. As Pius XII taught: “The Church, mother and teacher of all nations… has never ceased for one moment to encourage the faithful to pour out prayers, works, and alms for the conversion of pagans” (Evangelii Praecones §12). The symposium’s silence about converting migrants reveals acceptance of Vatican II’s heresy of religious liberty.
False Opposition Between Charity and Sovereignty
By framing the debate as “balance” between compassion and national interests, participants accept the conciliar sect’s dialectic. Catholic doctrine knows no such dichotomy. Leo XIII’s Immortale Dei establishes that “the State must serve the Church” (§6) in facilitating the conversion of all peoples. Neither open borders nor nationalist isolation serve this end – only confessional states implementing Catholic immigration policies:
- Total prohibition of non-Catholic immigration (Council of Valencia, 1229)
- Expulsion of unassimilated populations after grace period (Spanish Laws of the Indies, 1573)
- Mandatory catechesis for migrants (Third Plenary Council of Baltimore, 1884)
The panel’s pragmatic approach constitutes apostasy from these immutable standards. Pecknold’s appeal to Aquinas ignores the Angelic Doctor’s requirement that “infidels should be compelled to accept the faith” (Summa II-II Q10 A8) – a teaching abrogated by the conciliar sect’s heretical ecumenism.
Conclusion: Two Faces of the Same Modernist Coin
Both symposium participants and their USCCB opponents operate within the same modernist framework. The conciliar sect promotes migration as multicultural dissolution of nations; the “conservatives” resist through naturalistic nationalism. Both reject Christ’s Social Kingship. As St. Pius X warned: “The true friends of the people are neither revolutionaries nor innovators: they are traditionalists” (Notre Charge Apostolique §25). Until migration policies serve the exclusive goal of establishing Catholic confessional states, all such discussions remain satanic diversions from the Church’s true mission.
Source:
U.S., Hungarian thought leaders share ethical concerns over mass migration (ewtnnews.com)
Date: 10.02.2026