The Episcopal Migration Ministry’s $53 million funding for migrant resettlement in 2023 has sparked debate over the role of religious organizations in immigration services.
At a Glance
- Episcopal Migration Ministries received $53 million in 2023 for resettling 3,600 migrants
- The organization plans to resettle 6,400 migrants in 2024
- Concerns raised about financial incentives overshadowing compassionate narratives
- U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops received significantly more funding for similar efforts
- Debate continues over the balance between altruism and profitability in religious migration services
Episcopal Church’s Role in Migrant Resettlement
The Episcopal Migration Ministry (EMM) has found itself at the center of a contentious debate surrounding the role of religious organizations in migrant resettlement. In 2023, EMM received $53 million in taxpayer funds to resettle 3,600 migrants, with plans to increase that number to 6,400 in 2024. This substantial funding has raised questions about the motivations behind such humanitarian efforts and the financial implications for religious institutions involved in immigration services.
The Episcopal Church’s involvement in migrant resettlement is part of a larger system of religious organizations participating in these efforts. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops and Catholic Charities, for instance, receive significantly more funding for similar resettlement programs. This has led to scrutiny of the financial aspects of these humanitarian activities and their impact on the organizations involved.
The financial benefits for religious organizations involved in migrant resettlement have come under scrutiny. EMM reportedly benefits from resettling refugees with social or psychological difficulties, including those identifying as LGBTQ, under the “Preferred Communities” program. Additionally, the Episcopal Church earns a commission from collecting on travel loans made to refugees, which are funded by U.S. taxpayers.
While some defend these practices as necessary for providing comprehensive support to refugees, others argue that the financial incentives may overshadow the compassionate narrative often presented by these organizations. The debate highlights the complex interplay between altruism, advocacy, and financial interests within religious migration services.
It would certainly explain why the female Episcopal bishop lectured Trump, wouldn’t it?
Advocacy and Criticism
Religious leaders have been vocal in their support for more “compassionate” immigration policies – and by compassionate, they mean give away everything for free, even at the risk of endangering the American people.
Bishop Mariann Budde of the Episcopal Church used the Inaugural Prayer Service to criticize Trump’s immigration policies, as we’re sure you remember, calling for the new President to have “mercy” on people feeling “scared.”
However, this advocacy has not been without criticism. Many politicians and commentators have questioned the motives behind religious organizations’ involvement in migrant resettlement. J.D. Vance, for instance, argued that American leaders should prioritize their compassion for fellow citizens.
“As an American leader, but also just as an American citizen, your compassion belongs first to your fellow citizens,” J.D. Vance said.
Well, now we know why she did it.
The Episcopal Migration Ministry’s activities are part of a larger landscape of refugee resettlement in the United States. The U.S. Conference of Catholic Bishops’ Migration and Refugee Services (USCCB) is the largest refugee resettlement agency in the world, resettling about 18% of U.S. refugees annually. These organizations operate within a framework of changing government policies and global migration trends.
Recent years have seen significant fluctuations in refugee admission ceilings. The Trump administration reduced the ceiling to a record low of 15,000 per year, while President Joe Biden later raised it to 125,000. These policy changes have had profound effects on the operations of resettlement agencies, with some, like EMM, facing layoffs and program reductions during periods of decreased admissions.
