1 Introduction
The assessment of migration as it is experienced in the 21st century, especially post-2015, has not reached a consensus yet in the ecumenical world. National and international ecumenical bodies have approached one of the most urgent political questions of today: how should we react to the migration of millions intending to move to more stable countries than their own? The political question is being shaped slightly differently in the church: is migration a God-given human right, is it approved by the Bible, do churches need to support the process and its partakers? Moreover, typical issues addressed by the secular world are also considered, such as the future of the Christian religion and culture in a land shared by Christians and Muslims alike and the question of a possible loss of Western and Christian identity.
Although the issue has been dealt with by most international ecumenical organizations, underlining its unquestionable relevance today, I will limit my attention in this study to the analysis of the work of the World Council of Churches (WCC) and the Ecumenical Council of Churches in Hungary (ECCH) in order to illustrate how the discussion on migration is polarized on the global and the local level in the one church and the one ecumenical world. Reflection on the ways the church holds two views on migration that drive people apart is essential in the struggle for the unity of the church.
In this chapter, I will concentrate on addressing the question of how polarization manifests itself around the issue of migration in the ecumenical world. I will focus on analyzing the views and opinions of the above-mentioned two ecumenical organizations as they are expressed in statements, different types of written outcomes of meetings (communiques, messages, greetings), articles and television speeches between 2015 and 2019. The WCC has dedicated a lot of attention in the form of written material to the question of migration compared to the Hungarian national ecumenical body. Although
2 The Social and Theological Teachings of the WCC on Migration
Since its beginnings, the World Council of Churches (WCC) has been involved in the protection of people who became migrants and refugees as a consequence of the Second World War.1 The fourth assembly of Uppsala (1968) adopted the âStatement on the Middle Eastâ in which the WCC expresses its will to â⦠join with all who search for a solution for the refugee and displaced person problems.â2 Today the work of the WCC on migration is connected to its other work areas on human trafficking, development, conflicts and racism, and a closer cooperation is realized with the United Nations and related agencies. The commitment of the WCC to the support of refugees and migrants is evident from its public communication, and it is clear that as a church organization, it builds its view on a biblical basis. Although the organizationâs texts about migrants and refugees do not contain many theological elaborations, it is possible to discover underlying theological tenets in its discourse about the issue. A key Christian justification of the protection and support of migrants used by the WCC is the welcoming of the stranger (Matt. 25:35).
The WCC has been following the political and social developments of the migrant crisis since 2015, has reacted to major events, and voiced its opinion in different statements, news releases and speeches. This research focuses on
The content of the documents demonstrates that, like the UN and related agencies, the WCC focuses on supporting refugees, welcoming them in the destination countries, integrating them in societies, and it argues also for putting an end to the political and social reasons that cause mass migrations. A stressed point in the documentsâmostly those of 2016âis the fear societies and churches struggle with, and their rejection of and hostility towards refugees and migrants. Part of this fear is about the loss of identity that plays a very important role in the Hungarian society. Munich recognizes this fear of losing identity in hosting countries. This statement also perceives the renationalization of politics, which indicates an awareness of the role of nationalism within the context of the migration crisis. The US statement alludes to the significance of ethnic and religious identity differences in the processes of international refuge and protection. Lisbon points out the increasing racism churches are concerned about. Uppsala acknowledges the fear of the possible change of Western cultural identities due to the impact of migration.
In its theological reasoning, the WCC uses both Old Testament and New New Testament passages to support its vision on hospitality and welcoming. While migration is viewed as an integral part of human history, migrants and refugees are considered part of the one human family created in the image and likeness of God; therefore, strangers are brothers and sisters and it is a human obligation to welcome and help them. From a New Testament point of view, they embody Christ, who commanded his audience to welcome and support the stranger, the hungry, the thirsty, and the needy.
The theological discussions of migration in 2015 started with the identification of the stranger with the refugees and migrants (Matthew 25) and became extended later with the interpretation of the human being as created after
In 2016, the theological argument of Lunteren and Trondheim emphasizes that one should not fear but be hospitable. In 2017, the Joint Working Group between the Roman Catholic Church and the World Council of Churches (JWG) brings a new element into the discussion. Migration, one of the major contemporary social issues that divide churches today, is being turned from a dividing issue into a uniting one, a common service that brings churches closer to each other. The group plans to provide pastoral and practical recommendations regarding this issue that can foster ecumenical cooperation. In 2018, the Rome conference document adds to the discussion that migration is an inherent experience in the Abrahamic traditions. It recognizes that peopleâs fear of migrants suggests that this phenomenon has to be examined as well.
The WCC strongly advocates hospitality, supporting migrants, welcoming them in the destination countries, integrating them in societies, as well as ending the reasons of migration. The decisive theological arguments emphasize, on the one hand, that migrants are part of the one human family created after the image and likeness of God; they are sisters and brothers and therefore there is an obligation to support them. On the other hand, they also embody Christ, who called for helping the stranger, the hungry, and the needy (Matthew 25). Migration is looked at as an integral part of human history, inherent in the Abrahamic traditions.
The WCCâs awareness of the challenges of socio-cultural identities in the contemporary migration crisis is indicated in several documents. The organization offers theological views on the problem, mostly providing ethical responses that are based on the narrative of love and hope. However, this answer does not seem to be sufficient, since it does not provide a solution to issues that cause fear, rooted in the differences of socio-cultural identities. To further contribute to the goal of hospitality and ecumenical cooperation as well as supporting member churches encountering fear, silence and division, theological reflection on socio-cultural identities in the contemporary crisis of global migration would be an utmost necessity.
3 The Approach of the ECCH to Migration
The story of the ECCH goes back to 1943 when the Hungarian Reformed and Lutheran churches founded the so-called Hungarian Committee of the
As opposed to the WCC, the ECCH has not published any statement on migration, refugees, or the social-political challenges in the period from 2015 to 2019. In the spring of 2015, a conference was organized at the ECCH premises with the theme of migration. The conference produced the material for the 90th anniversary edition of the journal of the ECCH. However, the volume does not represent officially the point of view of the organization. Instead, it is a compilation of papers of various scholars who presented their perspectives at the conference, hence the expressed views cannot be taken as that of the ECCH. A way to grasp the stance of the ECCH in the debate on migration is by assessing the work of the scholars and pastors involved in the work of the organization. For this chapter, the choice is made to examine the work of the two leading figures of the organization, which allows us to take a look at examples of both Reformed and Lutheran theological interpretations of migration in Hungary at the present. Speeches and writings of Vilmos Fischl, Lutheran pastor, general secretary of the ECCH, and of József Steinbach, Reformed bishop, president of the ECCH will be discussed in the following paragraphs.
Vilmos Fischl (1972â) is a Lutheran pastor holding a Ph.D. in military science. Currently he serves both the church and a national institution. He fulfills the role of General Secretary of the ECCH as well as functions as a research associate at the National University of Public Service. Fischl defended his habilitation thesis in 2020 at this university on questions of dialogue between Hungary and North Africa and the Middle East with special emphasis on persecuted Christians. Before, Fischl worked as a Lutheran parish minister and served in the diverse setting of the airport chaplaincy in Budapest. His knowledge on the Islamic religion and culture was enhanced by scholarships in Kuwait and Tunisia. Fischl is often a guest on different programs on religion and politics on the Hungarian television channel M1, owned and operated by the oldest television broadcaster in Hungary (called Magyar TelevÃzió) which is run by a public foundation where the Hungarian government represents a decisive majority.
3.2 Differences between Church and State on Migration and Mission
While the leaders of churches in Europe have raised their voice with the aim of providing shelter to refugees and migrants, emphasizing that the principle of humanitarian treatment has to be applied, political leaders often favour other options: their rationale is determined by quotas or protective fences.20
Considering the Hungarian scene, the urgent question arises: do church and state represent opposing views and practices regarding the issue of migration? The largest churches (Roman Catholic, Reformed, and Lutheran) have not officially opposed the governmentâs actions on migration since 2015, even though there have been opinions present in them which contradicted the governmentâs views on migration. What is the stand of the general secretary of the ECCH in a country where the governing Fidesz party is strongly against the global migration processes and promotes local humanitarian support in areas of conflict and crisis instead of receiving migrants?
3.3 Reacting to the Persecution of Christians Based on the Catholicity and Unity of the Church
Reacting to the global persecution of Christians,23 Fischl affirms that Hungary is exemplary for having established the âState Secretariat for the Aid of Persecuted Christiansâ24 and acknowledges the excellent functioning of the establishment. He makes a reference to the unity of the church when he explains that the persecution of Christians affects Hungarians, as the persecuted Christians
3.4 A Christian Ethic of Selective Acceptance?
Fischl argues that acceptance is a basic tenet of the Christian faith; as Jesus received the people, Christians should receive them as well. However, he points out that the command of Jesus is selective, since Jesusâ words âreceive each otherâ do not mean the reception of everyone.26
Fischl therefore asks the question: who can be received? Do people who claim to be persecuted for religious or political reasons have to identify themselves? He provides one answer quoting the Hungarian imam Miklós Ahmed Kovács: â⦠we would expect refugees who are useful for the country. We do not need extremist Muslims who do not want to fit in.â27 Fischl indicates that representatives of the Islamic State have no place in Europe or in Hungary, therefore secret services and other professionals are to filter them out. At the same time, Fischl furthers the notion of living together with the Muslims who are already in Europe and who did not come with IS purposes.28 Fischl makes a link between security concerns and selection for acceptance, but at this point he does not connect reception to categories of national and ethnic identity.
Philip Watt argues that âthe language of assimilation is now back in vogue in some EU countries.â29 The approach of integration in the sense of assimilation as opposed to multiculturalism or interculturalism is a common way of thinking in Hungary regarding the present-day Muslim-Christian scene of Europe. In Fischlâs works and speeches, integration is also a reflected notion. Referring to the migration into Europe, he argues that Western churches and governments have to deal with the settlement and integration of refugees, while Hungaryâs role is to provide food and accommodation for them in the transfer period.30 Clearly, it is important for Fischl that Muslims in Europe are able to practice their faith even though they have to make accommodations due to the culture, the civilization in which they live. They have to integrate in the sense of assimilation. Fischl claims that this type of integration must be sought, and support for this must be given to the newcomers.31
The present Hungarian government often talks about the problem of integration. According to Fidesz representatives, the failure of refugee and migrant integration in Western Europe is a sign and lesson that urges Hungary not to accept mass-migration of non-European people.32
Fischl insists that countries have the right and the obligation to meet the needs of their community; however, they must also feed the starving people. At the same time, Fischl claims, feeding the hungry is not a sufficient solution, and therefore the reasons behind migration have to be eliminated. He asserts that people should live in peace in their home countries, and states have the right and duty to defend their frontiers. These ideas are also present in the discourse of the Hungarian government. In the public lecture held at the ECCH offices, Balázs Orbán,33 Minister of State, argued that the plan of Hungary is to offer help in countries where it is necessary. Replying to a request to assess
The issue of socio-cultural identities comes to the fore when Fischl argues that culture and civilization in the places where migrants come from are different from the European culture. Although, as mentioned above, Fischl does not connect reception of migrants to the question of socio-cultural identities, he calls attention to the difficulties of the process of integration, specifically due to social and cultural differences between the sending and receiving countries. Tribal societies in Afghanistan, the Middle East, or North-AfricaâFischl arguesârepresent such a difference in terms of socialization that it is not easy or even impossible to make the transition to the Western type of democratic society and civilization. Fischl indicates that there will be some persons who are successful and many who will fail to integrate.34 However, when analyzing the refugee mission work of the Reformed Church in Hungary, Fischl takes the point of integration as a measuring tool of the success of the work and indicates a very high integration rate into the Hungarian society: it is mostly 80â90%, but sometimes it is 100%.35 These data seem to suggest that certain processes of integration can offer a solution to difficulties rooted in socio-cultural differences.
Fischl poses the question of how Europe should relate to Muslims, and calls for Europeans to be understanding and humanitarian towards migrants who are lost and perplexed in a totally alien culture. Migrants need help in order to adapt, he argues. On the other hand, he pleads that the receptive and understanding attitude cannot mean renouncing oneâs own culture and an openness in every single case. There can be no compromises with the Islamic State. He is convinced that it was the total openness of Europe earlier which made it possible for the extremists to plan terrorist attacks in European cities.36
3.6 Re-Christianization of Europe
In an M1 programme with the theme âthe persecution of Christians and false migration politics of the EU,â Fischl elaborates on the notion of Christian mission, referring to the Great Commission (Matt. 28:16â20), and pleads for the
In another television show,38 Fischl comments on the continuously decreasing number of Christian inhabitants and the growing number of Muslims in Europe. He suggests that this process is reversible, if ministers and priests do their tasks of visiting families, hospitals and provide religious education, and if parents show their children an exemplary Christian life. Fischl acknowledges that the work of the Holy Spirit is also a determining factor in this process.
3.7 Refugees and Migrants, Legal and Illegal
In a public lecture39 given in GyÅr, Hungary, Fischl gives account of a WCC visit in Hungary and highlights the significance of the different nature of Western and Hungarian media impacting the work of ecumenical bodies. He points to the differences in the information provided by the Hungarian and the Swiss media, highlighting that the Swiss media does not offer a realistic picture of the migrant situation at the Hungarian borders. He holds the media responsible for the WCC delegatesâ lack of information. He explains that the WCCâs general secretary visited Hungary with a delegation of five as they deemed that there was a crisis situation in the country and the international committee decided to check whether Hungary did everything according to the international regulations. The committee met with representatives of churches and the government: the Reformed Bishop István Szabó, the Lutheran Bishop Tamás Fabiny, the President of the Catholic Bishopsâ Conference Bishop András Veres, as well as with Bence Rétvári, Minister of State. As Fischl concludes, the delegation left Hungary with a totally different picture from what they had received from the Western media in Geneva. He illustrated this statement with the following
According to Fischl, illegal migration must be fought, while legal migration is acceptable. He believes that migration can be legal only when migrants hold identification documents and apply for a visa. Fischl holds that it is against international law for a person to travel in Europe without being able to identify himself/herself.40
3.8 Hungary Helps
In 2015, when refugees and migrants arrived in large numbers and asked Hungary for permission to enter, the government emphasized the huge pressure migrants would put on the social system. In a questionnaire, the government suggested that it is either the Hungarian families and babies, or the immigration that can be supported financially.41 According to news releases, Hungary did not want to accept migrants initially because of the financial problem to which the government referred. Later, the issue of the threat of terrorism became the most important argument. This led to the quota denial, fueling the debate on migration between the Western European countries and the Visegrád countries in 2016. The âHungary Helpsâ programme was launched in 2017 with the aim of providing humanitarian support for communities of persecuted Christians and victims of humanitarian catastrophes elsewhere in order to contribute to the eradication of the root causes of migration.42
Fischl points out that the main reason why Hungary runs the programme âHungary Helpsâ is that in the migration from 2015 onwards the wealthy Western and
3.9 József Steinbach, President of the ECCH
József Steinbach (1964â) is a Reformed theologian, bishop, and leader in the Hungarian ecumenical world. He studied theology in Budapest as well as anthropology, ethics, and social sciences in Veszprém, Hungary. He started serving as a Reformed minister in 1991 and, since 1996, he has fulfilled different leadership roles in the Reformed church. In 2009, he was elected and installed as bishop of the Transdanubian Church District of the Reformed Church of Hungary. Currently, Steinbach teaches practical theology at the Reformed Theological Academy in Pápa, Hungary, and, since 2012, he has served as the president of the ECCH.
3.10 Temporal and Spatial Constraints on Hospitality
Steinbach formulates his opinion on migration in the 2015 anniversary publication45 of the ECCH. Although, he refrains from either conveying the official position of the churchâwhich can come only from the synod of the churchâor claiming that he knows the solution to the problem of migration, he highlights the importance of dealing with this question in an ecumenically concerted way.
⦠hospitality in antiquity and hospitality according to Christ never meant that the host would have provided the merciful act of hospitality and welcoming endlessly, without limitations; he definitively never gave his house to the person asking for help; it was about a few days and nights and then the person went about his business.46
Even though Steinbach believes that the merciful love of Christ should be practiced in connection with migration, he argues that the responsibility of the individual is limited. He explains that God restricts the responsibility of the individual to their surroundings. He asserts that âGod did not entrust us, everyday people, with all the miseries of the world, but within our own direct environment, our culture and Christianity.â47
We do not have to go to a foreign continent: we also have the poor here. It is a big delusion to think that we become just by helping the poor who live far away.
These people also have the chance to start to fight, with lots of sacrifices and hard work like others have fought as well; creating not a perfect society, but a society more humane and with more welfare â¦
The sinful ⦠is not busy, does not fight using the opportunities s/he has, does not toil, but repines and expects income, or if s/he does not have it, takes it of the other. â¦
If people approach us in this way, we must protect what we have â¦48
Reflecting on the protection of property, Steinbach envisions the possibility of an attack and invasion against Christians by the foreigner, and he argues that self-defense is a command of Christian ethics: â⦠we do not harm anyone, we help who we can, but if they want to harm us, we defend ourselves and what belongs to us, we will not let go what God entrusted to us.â49 Interpreting Jesusâs command âIf anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek alsoâ (Matt. 5:39, NIV), Steinbach warns that this command
I find it unacceptable that we who live in Europe feel unpleasant due to misinterpretations of love and solidarity. We need to protect our Christian heritage and culture, though we are not allowed to define ourselves in contrast to others. When I see people suffering ⦠I pray and I help as I can. At the same time, I understand that political leaders sometimes have to make determined decisions in order to protect their country. I believe that God requires us to help our direct environment and not to care about all the problems in the world. We are responsible first of all for our families, our smaller and wider environment, and only after this we need to release, as much as possible, the other miseries of the world without putting ourselves at risk.52
3.11 âDanger is Palpableâ: Migration Must Be Prevented
God did not put us accidentally where we were born. I do not understand why the other is more attractive and better than your own. It is like denying my own child in order to help the other. The most important ones are the ones who are entrusted to me, my beloved ones, my belief, my culture, my people.53
Using a centuries old image of Hungarian national identity, Steinbach claims that today Hungary is the last bulwark of Europe.54 He is also convinced that the Visegrád Group forms a âsafety netâ and a counterweight to Western European political thinking. He expresses both his trust that other states will join this alliance and his belief that God will move the future of Europe in this direction of political and cultural thinking.55
3.12 The Financially Captive Church
In a newspaper interview in 2018,56 Steinbach is confronted with the accusation of the political opposition, that Christian churches offer support to the government. In his reply, the ECCH president affirms that the churches support the government. He explains that the Reformed Church of Hungary does not have capital to support the congregations, and therefore the congregations must be self-sustaining. For the necessary developments for the church in order to perform its tasks, however, the financial support of the government is necessary.
At the same time, the whole problem should not be approached only from the present. It is unfortunateâand this is our great responsibility or sin, if you likeâthat we never transcend the present looking into the near or far future, perhaps by modelling what consequences a process can have. We have been warned about these consequences for a long time, while we cannot solve our own similar problems.57
Steinbach echoes here the Fidesz governmentâs fear that the reception of migrants in high numbers creates a basis for a future Muslim-dominated society where Christians will lose the rights they have today.
To sum up the views of both theologians, Fischl recognizes two different directions churches and states may take: the way of security and the way of solidarity. In a Lutheran tradition, he distinguishes between the role of the state and the church: he emphasizes the importance of security, therefore the role of the state, while he believes it is important that churches offer humanitarian help. In order to maintain safety in Hungary, he finds the role of security services important, especially, to defend the country against possibly dangerous, destructive people. In terms of reception, he differentiates between peaceful Muslims and Muslims representing an IS ideology; between refugees and migrants; and between legal and illegal migrants. Moreover, he argues that acceptance must be selective. While he accepts the possibility of co-existence with Muslims in European societies and acknowledges the right of Muslims to practice their religion in a dominantly Christian society, he presses the importance of helping in the âlocus of the problemâ (i.e., zones of conflict, war, etc.), which seems to be connected to the perceived fact that socio-cultural differences make integration into Western societies difficult. Fischl stresses the role of a mission-oriented Christianity that advocates a strong and distinctive identity based on the tenets of the Christian faith with the ultimate purpose of the re-Christianization of Europe.
4 Conclusion
The second half of the 2010s witnessed a growing polarization in the ecumenical movement that centered around the issue of migration. The 2015 influx of migrants to the European continent urged churches and church-related organizations to express their views on the concept of migration, refugee and migrant reception, and the possibilities of socio-cultural co-existence. The process of a theological assessment of the phenomenon started earlier in the WCC than in Hungarian churches, and the global ecumenical body produced more written material in the form of statements, articles and published speeches. Although one would still wish that the ECCH, as the ecumenical body of eleven churches in Hungary, formulates an official opinion on the issue of migration, the issue has been discussed by individual church leaders associated with the organization.
Comparing the concerns of the two organizations, we can see that the theologians connected to the ECCH share certain themes with the WCC: putting an end to the political and social causes of mass migrations, the fear societies and churches struggle with (e.g., loss of identity), differences in ethnic and religious identity, and the social phenomenon of the rejection of and hostility towards refugees and migrants. However, some other concerns of the WCC, such as supporting and welcoming refugees in the destination countries, integrating them in societies, the biblical-theological foundations of hospitality, and the issue of racism are less prominent in the discourse of the two Hungarian theologians. There are, however, several themes that the two Hungarian theologians emphasize and also share with the present Hungarian government: the acute problem of the global persecution of Christians, the doubts about the possibility of a successful integration of migrants into European societies, and the pressing need for the re-Christianization of Europe. The WCC and ECCH theologiansâ answers to these concerns diverge: while for the WCC these concerns do not mean restrictions on the practice of hospitality, in the discourse of the
The polarized way of thinking of the two ecumenical organizations raises the compelling question of what ecumenical theology has to offer and what the unity of Christians can mean against the backdrop of the migrant crisis in Europe. In order to give voice to the concerns of churches and organizations that share views with the Hungarian theologians, and to reach yet another step towards unity, it is necessary to revisit the following questions in the global ecumenical world.
The main emphasis of the WCC is on supporting, welcoming, and integrating refugees and migrants without differentiating between them according to legal status. The Hungarian theologians limit the responsibility of the church, as they divide tasks in the area of migration between church and state, where the unquestionable task of the state is to secure safety, and the task of churches to do humanitarian work based on solidarity within the security frame provided by the government. In the discourses of Fischl and Steinbach, there is place for a selective reception of migrants, for a temporally restricted way of reception, and for limited responsibilities in terms of geographical location. There is also a call to fight for and protect what is owned by Christian Europeans, including Hungarians. The Hungarian theologians find it more urgent to work on the political and social factors that cause mass migrations, and therefore they support the government-led programme âHungary Helps,â which aids needy local communities in war zones, areas of conflict, or natural catastrophes. While the WCC also holds this background of 21st-century migration processes accountable and necessary to deal with, the organization addresses the caring for refugees as a crucial matter. For Fischl and Steinbach, illegal migrants are not perceived as possible subjects of hospitality. Fischl makes it clear that legal migrants should be helped, but migrants without documents are not to be received. Steinbach pushes the responsibility for migrants even further away: to support geographically distant people comes only after helping the needy in the immediate environment. For him, urgency is connected to geographical distance: the closer, the more urgent. Consequently, the concept of human rights in migration needs to be theologically reflected in the global ecumenical discussion and, in this light, ecumenical consensus is needed on what the responsibilities of church and state are in the area of migration especially regarding the practice of hospitality.
Fear plays an important role in the discourses of both the WCC and the ECCH theologians. Several WCC documents acknowledge that, as societies
and churches accept refugees and migrants, they struggle with fear partly related to the possibility of a cultural change and loss of identity as a consequence of the socio-cultural differences between the European population and the newcomers. The WCC relates it to the problem of racism, but Hungarian theologians do not see racism in the area of migration as a problem to tackle in the Hungarian society. As an answer to fear, Fischl talks about the necessity of the re-Christianization of Europe, while the WCC documents suggest overcoming the fear. The Roman-Catholic-WCC Joint Working Group turns the challenge into a source of blessing and points to the opportunity that times of migration might bring for the divided Church: through common service it is possible to get closer to each other and take a new step toward unity. Both the issue of socio-cultural identities and the problem of racism connected to migration should be dealt with in further ecumenical dialogue. Migration should be examined in order to discover whether it has the potential to enhance the unity of the Church. Ecumenical agreement is needed on where the place of fear induced by changing social processes is in our theologies, what the theological values of personal safety and property are, and how the safety and well-being of the host and the guest relate to each other. As the WCC argues, based on biblical passages both from the Old and the New Testament, migrants and refugees are part of the one human family created in the image and likeness of God and they embody Christ. Fischl agrees with the WCC that Christian migrants are brothers and sisters of the Christians of the receiving countries; however, for the WCC, all migrants represent brothers and sisters, as everyone belongs to the one human family created after the image and likeness of God. Steinbach interprets biblical hospitality as temporally limited hospitality and this view might also justify the rejection of migrants asking for a new home. Global ecumenical dialogue is required to define the place of refugees and migrants in relation to the one Christian community, to formulate a common consensus about what times of migration teach us regarding the unity and catholicity of the church, as well as who belongs to the one church of God and what responsibilities stem from this belonging.
Bibliography
âCommuniqué by the Joint Working Group,â September 19, 2017. Accessed March 22, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/commissions/jwg-rcc-wcc/communique-by-the-joint-working-group-september-2017.
âCommuniqué by the Joint Working Group between the WCC and the RCC,â September 7, 2017. Accessed March 22, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/commissions/communique-by-the-joint-working-group-between-the-wcc-and-the-rcc-september-2018.
Fischl, Vilmos. âA nemzetközi fellépés tapasztalatai és lehetÅségei a civil szervezetek és egyházak szerepe, különös tekintettel a protestáns egyházakraâ (Experiences and possibilities of international engagement: The role of civil organisations and churches with special emphasis on the Protestant churches), in Budapest-jelentés a keresztényüldözésrÅl, Emberi ErÅforrások Minisztériuma (Budapest Report on the persecution of Christians, Ministry of Human Capacities), ed. Balázs Orbán, 185â194. Budapest, 2017.
Fischl, Vilmos. Magyarország párbeszéd lehetÅségei Ãszak-Afrikával és a Közel-Kelettel, különös tekintettel az üldözött keresztényekre (Dialogue Opportunities of Hungary with North-Africa and the Middle-East with Special Emphasis on Persecuted Christians). Habilitation Thesis.
Fischl, Vilmos. âThe Role of Churches in Hungary in Providing Pastoral Care and Humanitarian Help for Migrants.â Academic and Applied Research in Military and Public Management Science (AARMS) 17:2 (2018): 17â28.
âGreetings of Rev. Dr Olav Fykse Tveit: World Conference on Xenophobia, Racism, and Populist Nationalism In the Context of Global Migration and Refugees,â September 18, 2018. Accessed March 12, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/resources/documents/greetings-of-rev-dr-olav-fykse-tveit-world-conference-on-xenophobia-racism-and-populist-nationalism-in-the-context-of-global-migration-and-refugees/.
ââHave no Fearâ: A Statement,â June 20, 2016. Accessed March 12, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-programmes/umer/mission-from-the-margins/migration/have-no-fear.
âMessage from the conference âXenophobia, Racism and Populist Nationalism in the Context of Global Migration,ââ September 19, 2018. Accessed January 10, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/message-from-the-conference-xenophobia-racism-and-populist-nationalism-in-the-context-of-global-migration-19-september-2018.
Miklós, Soltész. Magyarország a kereszténység védÅbástyája (Soltész Miklós: Hungary is the bulwark of Christendom). Accessed November 20, 2020. https://magyarnemzet.hu/belfold/soltesz-miklos-magyarorszag-a-keresztenyseg-vedobastyaja-7306913/.
âNe lökdössük a dominót!â (Letâs not push the dominos), interview with Reformed Bishop József Steinbach to the conservative weekly news magazine Heti Válasz, April 12, 2017. http://valasz.hu/itthon/ne-lokdossuk-a-dominot-123366.
âNemzeti konzultáció a bevándorlásról és a terrorizmusrólâ (National consultation about immigration and terrorism). Accessed August 11. 2019 https://www.kormany.hu/download/7/e2/50000/nemzeti_konzultacio_bevandorlas_2015.pdf?fbclid=IwAR01eqZzka-pDz-P0-rtksePYYSH5ipZ4G5EyucOy-ARJGjpH1oQYDxDegI.
Orbán, Balázs. âMigration and the Future of Europe.â Public lecture at the ECCH headquarters. April 15, 2019.
âStatement on People on the Move: Migrants and Refugees,â November 7, 2018. Accessed March 23, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/executive-committee/uppsala-november-2018/statement-on-people-on-the-move-migrants-and-refugees.
âStatement on refugees in Europe.â September 4, 2015. Accessed March 23, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/general-secretary/statements/statement-on-refugees-in-europe.
âStatement on responses to migrant crises,â June 12, 2015. Accessed March 12, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/executive-committee/etchmiadzin-june-2015/statement-on-responses-to-migrant-crises-doc-no-29-rev.
âStatement on the Forced Displacement Crisis,â June 28, 2016. Accessed March 12, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/central-committee/2016/statement-on-the-forced-displacement-crisis.
âStatement on US Presidential Executive Order âProtecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United Statesâ and its Impact on Refugees,â Januari 31, 2017. Accessed March 22, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/general-secretary/joint-declarations/statement-on-us-presidential-executive-order-on-refugees.
Steinbach, József. âAz intésrÅlâ (About Discipline). Dunántúli Református Lap 19:4 (2015): 51â52.
Steinbach, József. âIsten szÃne elÅttâ (Before God). Theológiai Szemle 3 (2015): 132â133.
Steinbach, József. âTemplomtornyokâ (Church Towers). Dunántúli Református Lap 19:3 (2015): 52â53
âTaizé Greetings WCC general secretary Rev. Dr Olav Fykse Tveit,â December 2018. Accessed January 2, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/taize-greetings-wcc-general-secretary-rev-dr-olav-fykse-tveit-28-december-2018.
Watt, Philip. âAn Intercultural Approach to âIntegration.ââ Translocations: The Irish Migration, Race and Social Tranformation Review 1:1 (2006): 151â160.
WCC Central Committee, âStatement on the Middle East.â Heraklion, Crete, August 1967. Accessed January 31, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/central-committee/1967/statement-on-the-middle-east.
âWCC expresses grave concern for Rohingya people in Myanmar,â September 14, 2017. Accessed March 22, 2019. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-expresses-grave-concern-for-rohingya-people-in-myanmar.
âWhen the World Council of Churches came into existence in 1948, the disastrous humanitarian impacts of the Second World War were still a very present reality. The international community was still struggling to cope with the massive population displacements caused by conflict and crimes against humanity. Churches and their specialized ministries were key actors in the humanitarian response to this unprecedented suffering, and have continued to be in the forefront of assisting refugees and immigrants, from emergency relief to long-term support.â From the âStatement on refugees in Europe,â September 4, 2015, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/general-secretary/statements/statement-on-refugees-in-europe (accessed March 23, 2019).
WCC Central Committee, âStatement on the Middle East,â Heraklion, Crete, August 1967, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/central-committee/1967/statement-on-the-middle-east (accessed January 31, 2019).
In this chapter, the documents are referred to by the name of the location of the meeting where they were prepared. As there are more than one document related to the conference âXenophobia, Racism and Populist Nationalism in the Context of Global Migration,â to the reference of one of the documents, the name of the speaker is added as well (âTveit Romeâ).
âStatement on responses to migrant crises,â June 12, 2015, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/executive-committee/etchmiadzin-june-2015/statement-on-responses-to-migrant-crises-doc-no-29-rev (accessed March 12, 2019).
âStatement on the Forced Displacement Crisis,â June 28, 2016, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/central-committee/2016/statement-on-the-forced-displacement-crisis (accessed March 12, 2019).
âCommuniqué by the Joint Working Group,â September 19, 2017. https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/commissions/jwg-rcc-wcc/communique-by-the-joint-working-group-september-2017 (accessed March 22, 2019).
âCommuniqué by the Joint Working Group between the WCC and the RCC,â September 7, 2017, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/commissions/communique-by-the-joint-working-group-between-the-wcc-and-the-rcc-september-2018 (accessed March 22, 2019).
âStatement on People on the Move: Migrants and Refugees,â November 7, 2018, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/executive-committee/uppsala-november-2018/statement-on-people-on-the-move-migrants-and-refugees (accessed March 23, 2019).
âChurch Leadersâ Consultation on the European Refugee Crisis: Communique,â October 29, 2015, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/other-meetings/communique-munich (accessed March 12, 2019).
ââHave no Fearâ: A Statement,â June 20, 2016, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-programmes/umer/mission-from-the-margins/migration/have-no-fear (accessed March 12, 2019).
âMessage from the conference âXenophobia, Racism and Populist Nationalism in the Context of Global Migration,ââ September 19, 2018, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/message-from-the-conference-xenophobia-racism-and-populist-nationalism-in-the-context-of-global-migration-19-september-2018 (accessed January 10, 2019).
âGreetings of Rev. Dr Olav Fykse Tveit: World Conference on Xenophobia, Racism, and Populist Nationalism In the Context of Global Migration and Refugees,â September 18, 2018, (accessed March 12, 2019).
âTaizé Greetings WCC general secretary Rev. Dr Olav Fykse Tveit,â December 2018, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/taize-greetings-wcc-general-secretary-rev-dr-olav-fykse-tveit-28-december-2018 (accessed January 2, 2019).
âStatement on refugees in Europe,â September 4, 2015, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/general-secretary/statements/statement-on-refugees-in-europe (accessed March 23, 2019).
âStatement on US Presidential Executive Order âProtecting the Nation from Foreign Terrorist Entry into the United Statesâ and its Impact on Refugees,â Januari 31, 2017, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/general-secretary/joint-declarations/statement-on-us-presidential-executive-order-on-refugees (accessed March 22, 2019).
âWCC expresses grave concern for Rohingya people in Myanmar,â September 14, 2017, https://www.oikoumene.org/en/resources/documents/wcc-expresses-grave-concern-for-rohingya-people-in-myanmar (accessed March 22, 2019).
Egyetemes Egyháztanács Magyarországi Bizottsága.
Magyar Ãkumenikus ÃjjáépÃtési Bizottság.
ECCH member churches are: the Reformed Church in Hungary, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in Hungary, the Baptist Church of Hungary, the Hungarian Pentecostal Church, the United Methodist Church in Hungary, the Eparchy of Buda of the Serbian Orthodox Church, the Hungarian Exarchate of the Ecumenical Patriarchate of Constantinople, the Bulgarian Orthodox Church of Hungary, the Diocese of Gyula of the Romanian Orthodox Church in Hungary, the Diocese of Hungary of the Russian Orthodox Church and the Saint Margaretâs Anglican Episcopal Church of Budapest.
Vilmos Fischl, âThe Role of Churches in Hungary in Providing Pastoral Care and Humanitarian Help for Migrants,â Academic and Applied Research in Military and Public Management Science (AARMS) 17:2 (2018), 17â28, 17.
Fischl, âThe Role of Churches in Hungary,â 17.
Fischl, âThe Role of Churches in Hungary,â 17.
As Péter Szijjártó, Minister of Foreign Affairs and Trade of Hungary, explains, Christianity is the most persecuted religion in the world. Referring to the latest official statistics, the minister asserts that 260 million Christians are persecuted on a world-wide scale and three thousand Christian sisters and brothers were killed in 2020, meaning that eight Christians are killed daily. A further 9500 attacks were performed against Christian buildings and churches. Szijjártó claims that Europeans need to be aware of the fact that this phenomenon is not far away in geographic terms, since the persecution of Christians is present in Europe: attacks against French Christians, the terror acts in Vienna, Austria or the vandalizing of the statue of Pope II John Paul are incidents of Christian persecution. (Recorded speech from the âMinisterial to Advance Freedom of Religion or Belief,â November 16â17, 2020, posted on Péter Szijjártóâs Facebook page: https://fb.watch/1PiykZBnE5/ (accessed November 18, 2020).
This institution was established in 2016 with the twofold purpose of raising awareness of Christian persecution worldwide and directly supporting communities of persecuted Christians focusing mainly on the Middle East and the Sub-Saharan territories.
Television programme âThis Morningâ on the topic of the persecution of Christians and the âfalseâ migration politics of the EU,â Ma délelÅtt, M1, May 25, 2019, https://www.mediaklikk.hu/video/ma-delelott-2019-05-25-i-adas/?fbclid=IwAR3Bi_Jn4t_rNNppR5AZNMffmsMaxaR7R9ldghDrxD-Pw_bPY8pCnTpmNqI (accessed July 24, 2019).
Television programme âFace to Face,â SzemtÅl szembe, December 6, 2018, https://nava.hu/id/3445703/ (accessed August 6, 2019).
Vilmos Fischl, âA nemzetközi fellépés tapasztalatai és lehetÅségei a civil szervezetek és egyházak szerepe, különös tekintettel a protestáns egyházakraâ (Experiences and possibilities of international engagement: The role of civil organisations and churches with special emphasis on the Protestant churches), in Budapest-jelentés a keresztényüldözésrÅl, Emberi ErÅforrások Minisztériuma (Budapest Report on the persecution of Christians, Ministry of Human Capacities), ed. Balázs Orbán (Budapest, 2017), 185â194, 189.
Television programme âThis Morningâ on the topic of the persecution of Christians and the âfalseâ migration politics of the EU.
Philip Watt, âAn Intercultural Approach to âIntegrationâ,â Translocations: The Irish Migration, Race and Social Tranformation Review 1:1 (2006), 151â160, 155.
Fischl, âThe Role of Churches in Hungary.â
Television programme âThis Evening,â Ma este, July 2, 2019, https://www.mediaklikk.hu/video/ma-este-2019-07-02-i-adas-3/?fbclid=IwAR3S1CIOXnhcdq-DaVSnbt4ZumnPtk0JjjfsF3qQeC8g5wxUznsHlHXnYig#, acessed July 24, 2019.
See, for example, the interview of Zsuzsa Fekete, Director of Communications, RCH, with Prime Minister Viktor Orbán: âLesz lelki felÃvelés, ha lesznek keresztényekâ (There will be a spiritual upswing, if there are Christians), http://www.reformatus.hu/mutat/lesz-lelki-feliveles-ha-lesznek-keresztenyek/ (accessed August 4, 2019).
Balázs Orbán, âMigration and the Future of Europe,â Public lecture at the ECCH headquarters. April 15, 2019.
Vilmos Fischl, Magyarország párbeszéd lehetÅségei Ãszak-Afrikával és a Közel-Kelettel, különös tekintettel az üldözött keresztényekre (Dialogue Opportunities of Hungary with North-Africa and the Middle-East with Special Emphasis on Persecuted Christians), Habilitation Thesis, Manuscript, 53.
Fischl, Magyarország párbeszéd lehetÅségei, 58.
Fischl, Magyarország párbeszéd lehetÅségei, 44.
Television programme âThis Morningâ on the topic of the persecution of Christians and the âfalseâ migration politics of the EU.
Television programme âFace to Face,â SzemtÅl szembe, May 22, 2019, https://nava.hu/id/3516839/ (12:28â13:01), (accessed August 11, 2019).
âMigráció egyházi és biztonságpolitikai szempontbólâ (Migration from the point of view of the church and security policy), lecture given by Dr. Vilmos Fischl and Dr. György Nógrádi, published on October 28, 2015, on YouTube, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VOnsemR-GT4, (17:25â19:09), (accessed June 30, 2019).
Television programme âFace to Face,â SzemtÅl szembe, December 6, 2018, https://nava.hu/id/3445703/ (accessed August 6, 2019).
âNemzeti konzultáció a bevándorlásról és a terrorizmusrólâ (National consultation about immigration and terrorism), question 12: âDo you agree with the Hungarian government that the need is rather to support Hungarian families and babies to be born than to support immigration?â https://www.kormany.hu/download/7/e2/50000/nemzeti_konzultacio_bevandorlas_2015.pdf?fbclid=IwAR01eqZzka-pDz-P0-rtksePYYSH5ipZ4G5EyucOy-ARJGjpH1oQYDxDegI (accessed August 11, 2019).
See https://www.kormany.hu/en/prime-minister-s-office/state-secretariat-for-the-aid-of-persecuted-christians-and-for-the-hungary-helps-program (accessed February 1, 2020).
Fischl, Magyarország párbeszéd lehetÅségei, 6.
Fischl, Magyarország párbeszéd lehetÅségei, 6â7.
József Steinbach, âIsten szÃne elÅttâ (Before God), Theológiai Szemle 3 (2015), 132â133.
Steinbach, âIsten szÃne elÅtt,â 133: â⦠az ókori és a krisztusi vendégszeretet sem jelentette soha azt, hogy a vendéglátó, vég nélkül, és határok nélkül biztosÃtotta volna a vendéglátás és a befogadás irgalmas cselekedetét; soha nem adta át a segÃtséget kérÅnek végérvényesen a saját házát. Vagyis csupán néhány napról, éjszakáról volt szó, és az illetÅ ment a dolgára.â
Steinbach, âIsten szÃne elÅtt,â 133: âRánk, «mindennapi emberekre», Isten nem a világ összes nyomorúságát bÃzta, hanem a közvetlen környezetünket, azt a kultúrát, azt az ügyet, ami a miénk.â
József Steinbach, âTemplomtornyokâ (Church Towers), Dunántúli Református Lap 19:3 (2015), 52â53, 52.
József Steinbach, âAz intésrÅlâ (About Discipline), Dunántúli Református Lap 19:4 (2015), 51â52.
József Steinbach, âAz intésrÅl,â 51â52.
József Steinbach, âAz intésrÅl,â 51â52.
âNe lökdössük a dominót!â (Letâs not push the dominos), interview with Reformed Bishop József Steinbach to the conservative weekly news magazine Heti Válasz, April 12, 2017, http://valasz.hu/itthon/ne-lokdossuk-a-dominot-123366.
âNe lökdössük a dominót!â
Cf. the idea of Antemurale Christianitatis (Bulwark of Christendom), the ones who defend the frontiers of Christian Europe from the Ottoman Empire. The concept of âbulwark of Christianityâ is often applied to Hungary in the discourse of the Fidesz party, see, e.g., in a speech of Miklós Soltész, State Secretary for Religious and Ethnic Relations at the Prime Ministerâs Office: Soltész Miklós: Magyarország a kereszténység védÅbástyája (Soltész Miklós: Hungary is the bulwark of Christendom), https://magyarnemzet.hu/belfold/soltesz-miklos-magyarorszag-a-keresztenyseg-vedobastyaja-7306913/ (accessed November 20, 2020).
Soltész Miklós: Magyarország a kereszténység védÅbástyája.
âAz Ãr nem engedi elveszni Európát,â (The Lord wonât let Europe to be perished), interview with Reformed Bishop József Steinbach to the Magyar IdÅk (Hungarian Times), a national conservative newspaper associated with the Fidesz government, March 31, 2018.
József Steinbach in âAz Ãr nem engedi elveszni Európátâ: âUgyanakkor az egész problémát nem csupán a jelen felÅl kellene megközelÃteni. Sajnos, és ez nagy felelÅsségünk, ha úgy tetszik, bűnünk, hogy soha nem lépünk túl a jelenen, a közeli és távolabbi jövÅbe tekintve; akár modellezve, hogy egy folyamatnak mi lehet a következménye. Ezekre a következményekre pedig már régóta kapunk figyelmeztetéseket, miközben a saját, ehhez hasonló problémáinkat sem tudjuk megoldani.â