“Acts That Diminish or Disregard the Dignity of Any Person or Group of People Should Never Be Normalized in Our Society,” say Bishop Garcia and Bishop Cahill
WASHINGTON - In light of several recent immigration enforcement encounters resulting in the loss of life, Bishop Daniel E. Garcia, chairman of the U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Subcommittee for the Promotion of Racial Justice and Reconciliation, and Bishop Brendan J. Cahill, chairman of the Committee on Migration, issued the following pastoral reflection: “As Catholics, we believe that all persons are created in the image and likeness of God and, therefore, grieve all situations where human life is brought to an unnatural end. This is a core teaching of our faith and one we can never grow weary of proclaiming as disciples of Our Lord Jesus Christ. “As the bishops of the United States affirmed last November, ‘We are disturbed when we see among our people a climate of fear and anxiety around questions of profiling and immigration enforcement.’ Racial profiling in particular not only violates God-given dignity* but also inflicts profound harm on individuals, families, and communities by fostering fear, eroding trust, and increasing the risk of unjust and even tragic outcomes. Our pastoral concerns are distinct from what the civil law itself may permit. “Acts that diminish or disregard the dignity of any person or group of people should never be normalized in our society. The dehumanization of immigrants, regardless of their legal status, is one such example of this; the vilification of law enforcement officers is yet another. “We continue to affirm the legitimate role of civil authorities to implement the law in a humane manner and with respect for fundamental human rights, including the rights to life and due process. The power of the state must always be exercised within the limits of the moral law. To that end, we call for accountability, transparency, and justice, which require that meaningful reforms be made to our immigration system. “We join in praying for the souls of those killed and for their families, for our nation, and for all those entrusted with the duties of public service. We pray for an end to dehumanizing rhetoric, racial prejudice, and violence and for a renewed commitment to recognizing the inherent dignity of every person as a child of God. We plead for the intercession of Mary, Our Mother, who is the model of perfect faith in times of grief, hardship, and uncertainty.” * Open Wide Our Hearts , p. 4 ###
2 months ago
Two U.S. Catholic bishops – Daniel E. Garcia of Austin and Brendan J. Cahill of Victoria – issued a joint pastoral reflection condemning any act that diminishes the dignity of a person or group, and calling for accountability, transparency and reform of immigration enforcement after a series of deadly ICE encounters in July 2026. 2
In early July 2026, three migrants were killed during ICE operations: Lorenzo Salgado Araujo in Houston (July 7), Johan Sebastián Durán Guerrero in Maine (July 13), and Juan Jairo Coronilla Durán in Florida (July 15). ICE asserted the victims attempted to ram agents, a claim disputed by local authorities and a DHS spokesperson who said Salgado was not the intended target. 2
Garcia and Cahill emphasized that all people are created in the image of God and that “acts that diminish or disregard the dignity of any person or group of people should never be normalized in our society.” They cited the USCCB’s November 2025 special pastoral message on immigration, noting a “climate of fear and anxiety” around profiling and enforcement, and referenced the 2018 USCCB letter “Open Wide Our Hearts” on racism. 2 3
The bishops affirmed the legitimate role of civil authorities but insisted that law must be applied “in a humane manner and with respect for fundamental human rights, including the rights to life and due process.” They urged “accountability, transparency, and justice,” urging meaningful reforms to the immigration system and condemning both the dehumanization of immigrants and the vilification of law‑enforcement officers. 3
The statement was framed by broader statistics: The Guardian reported eight people shot dead by ICE agents under the current administration as of July 15, with additional injuries and incidents. Human Rights Watch and Physicians for Human Rights counted 52 deaths in ICE custody during the first 500 days of the second Trump administration, citing poor detention conditions and medical neglect. Over 60,000 people were in ICE custody, most without criminal convictions. 2
Garcia and Cahill concluded with prayers for the victims, their families, public servants, and for an end to dehumanizing rhetoric, racial prejudice and violence, invoking Mary as a model of faith in times of grief. 2*
Examine Catholic doctrine on human dignity versus state enforcement
Catholic doctrine teaches that human dignity is grounded in God, not in the preferences or power of the state; therefore, while legitimate civil authority can and must enforce laws for the common good, it is morally limited by the natural law and the fundamental rights of persons. When the state demands what violates conscience and the moral order, citizens are not bound to obey in that matter, and they may defend their rights within the bounds of the natural law and the Gospel.
The tension you are asking about—human dignity vs. state enforcement—has two layers in Catholic moral and social teaching:
From these premises, the Church develops a coherent account of obedience, conscience, and limits on governmental coercion.
Catholic doctrine does not treat dignity as a social award granted by law; it treats dignity as inherent.
The Catechism states that men and women possess an “inalienable dignity which comes to them immediately from God their Creator,” and both sexes share “one and the same dignity… in the image of God.”
Because all are created in the image of God and endowed with rational souls, “all therefore enjoy an equal dignity.”
Human dignity means the person is not just an object but a subject: capable of self-knowledge, self-possession, freedom, and communion with others, and called by grace into a covenant response of faith and love.
The doctrinal development highlighted in Dignitas Infinita emphasizes that the dignity of every human being “prevails beyond all circumstances.”
Implication for state enforcement: If dignity and rights are intrinsic and universal, then state power cannot legitimately redefine who counts as fully protected or determine that some persons may be treated as means to ends (i.e., deprived of rights that belong to persons as persons).
Catholic teaching affirms that civil authority is real and necessary for a well-ordered society.
The Catechism teaches that society “can be neither well-ordered nor prosperous unless” there are people invested with legitimate authority “to preserve its institutions” and care for the good of all.
It also defines “authority” as a quality enabling persons or institutions to make laws and give orders while expecting obedience.
The Church teaches that citizens freely decide the political regime and rulers, and that diverse regimes can be morally acceptable if they serve the legitimate good. But “regimes whose nature is contrary to the natural law… and to the fundamental rights of persons cannot achieve the common good.”
Gaudium et Spes explicitly says the Church can “anchor the dignity of human nature against all tides of opinion,” and that “by no human law” are personal dignity and liberty safeguarded “as by the Gospel of Christ.”
Implication for state enforcement: enforcement is legitimate when it serves the common good consistent with the natural law and fundamental rights; enforcement becomes unjust when it contradicts those rights.
Catholic doctrine does not reduce moral life to private preference; it gives clear boundaries for citizens under oppressive or wrongful demands.
The Catechism states that citizens are “obliged in conscience not to follow the directives of civil authorities when they are contrary to the demands of the moral order, to the fundamental rights of persons or the teachings of the Gospel.”
It grounds this in the distinction between serving God and serving the political community (“Render therefore to Caesar…” and “We must obey God rather than men”).
The Catechism adds a crucial nuance: when under oppression, citizens “should still not refuse to give or to do what is objectively demanded of them by the common good,” but it is legitimate to defend rights “within the limits of the natural law and the Law of the Gospel.”
So Catholic teaching does not endorse total civil disobedience as a blanket principle; it calls for a moral selectivity based on objective demands of justice and the common good, combined with resistance to unlawful (moral) demands.
In Gaudium et Spes, the Church warns against the idea that personal rights are “fully ensured” only when exempt from every divine requirement; that path “lies not the maintenance of the dignity of the human person, but its annihilation.”
Implication for enforcement: the state may enforce civil order, but it must not require violations of the moral law; citizens may resist that requirement in conscience while continuing to work for the common good.
A major area where dignity and state enforcement collide is the freedom of conscience and religion.
Dignitatis Humanae explains that the demand for freedom in society is that people act with responsible freedom “not driven by coercion but motivated by a sense of duty,” and that constitutional limits should restrain government to avoid encroaching on the rightful freedom of persons and associations.
Religious freedom is described as having to do with immunity from coercion in civil society, specifically regarding worship and duty to God.
Pope Leo XIV, summarizing Vatican II’s approach, states that religious freedom is grounded in human dignity and must be guaranteed by law to prevent people from being forced to act against their conscience or impeded from seeking and professing truth privately and publicly.
From the same line of teaching, Pope John Paul II stresses that rights flowing from human dignity are not subject to arbitrary interventions of the majority, but must be kept at the center of political decisions.
Implication for enforcement: Catholic doctrine treats coercion against conscience—especially in matters of God, truth, and worship—as a direct threat to the dignity of the person and thus a moral limit on what the state may enforce.
Putting the sources together yields a structured Catholic view:
This is not a call to abolish the state; it is a call to ensure that the state’s enforcement is morally ordered—and when it is not, to protect the person’s dignity through principled resistance rooted in the moral law.
Catholic doctrine presents a consistent principle: human dignity is God-given and inviolable, so the state may enforce laws only insofar as they serve the common good in conformity with natural law and fundamental rights. When state enforcement demands acts that violate the moral order or rights of persons, Catholics are obliged in conscience not to comply in that specific demand, while still working for the common good and defending rights within moral limits.