Bp. Barron and Dad29

Gee.  The Bishop gets it.  There's something implied here that +Barron won't say out loud, but it's obvious.  

In an O'Reilly interview, +Barron said this:

 ...Catholic social teaching says a government has a right to maintain its borders to enforce its immigration laws. It has to do it humanely, of course, but those two things are in a healthy tension with each other.

What I said to Vance was, you know, my job as a churchman is to articulate the principles. Your job, especially as a Catholic politician, is to formulate the policy. Don’t turn to me to say, “Now, what exactly should we do with this piece of immigration legislation?” I don’t have the detailed knowledge on the ground. That’s for people like you....

Yup.

He then went on to say that the US (and all other countries) must defend their borders because:

 ...the chaos caused by an open border — and I mean the moral chaos. Just [consider] the issue of child sex trafficking, which is staggering. And the more we read about that and more that becomes clear to us, the more we see that an unregulated border is a morally very dangerous proposition.

So, I don’t hold to that simple-minded view that, yes, welcome the stranger, therefore no immigration laws, therefore no regulated border. No, no, no, Catholic social teaching is nuanced on that point....

Gee.  We've been saying that for quite some time, and we've gone further.  USCC bureaucrats (and some simple-minded Bishops) are morally culpable for the sex- and drug- and labor-trafficking. Not all of them are "simple-minded," either; take that for what it's worth.

Barron implies exactly that.