Paris, 8. December 2025
On 8 December 2025, the ACRONYM project organised a closed-door Policy Dialogue on Migration at the Conférence des Évêques de France (CEF) in Paris. The dialogue brought together clergy, theologians, researchers, migration experts, and representatives of Church institutions to reflect on the relationship between Christian teaching, pastoral practice, and contemporary migration debates in Europe.
The dialogue took place against a backdrop of growing political polarisation, disinformation, and public anxiety around migration. Its aim was to create a protected space for frank exchange, grounded in empirical research and lived pastoral experience, and to explore how faith-based actors can contribute to more coherent, human-centred approaches to migration governance.
Migration beyond emergency thinking
A central point of convergence throughout the dialogue was the recognition that migration is not an episodic crisis but a structural and enduring feature of contemporary global life. Participants stressed that both public debate and ecclesial responses remain too often reactive and emergency-driven, despite the Church’s long-standing theological and pastoral tradition rooted in dignity, solidarity, and hospitality.
Theologian Fr. Aldo Skoda, Director of the Scalabrini International Migration Institute, emphasized that migration should be understood as a “sign of the times”, challenging the Church to rethink core dimensions of Christian anthropology, ecclesiology, and mission. He highlighted how dominant public categories and narratives often dehumanize migrants and distort integration processes, calling for a renewed theological and pastoral imagination centred on encounter, communion, and responsibility.
ACRONYM research as a foundation for dialogue
The exchanges strongly resonated with findings from ACRONYM research, including surveys, interviews, and focus groups conducted with priests and lay Catholics across Slovakia, France, Belgium, and Italy. Empirical results were repeatedly confirmed, nuanced, and deepened by clergy’s lived experiences shared during the dialogue.
Participants identified a persistent gap between ethical consensus at the level of Church teaching and the fragility of implementation in pastoral and institutional practice. Structural constraints — legal uncertainty, administrative complexity, limited resources, and political pressure — were cited as major obstacles, often leaving clergy to navigate deep moral dilemmas with insufficient institutional support.
Education, interdisciplinarity, and institutional support
Across interventions, education emerged as one of the most urgent priorities. Participants pointed to insufficient formation on migration, interculturality, and disinformation in seminaries, diocesan structures, and continuing pastoral training. This deficit was directly linked to vulnerability to polarising narratives and fear-based framings that dominate public discourse.
The dialogue also underlined the importance of interdisciplinary approaches, bringing theology into closer dialogue with social sciences, legal expertise, and empirical research. Participants agreed that durable responses to migration require integrated frameworks and long-term strategies rather than isolated initiatives.
A crisis of narrative coherence
Rather than a crisis of numbers, migration was repeatedly described as a crisis of narrative and moral coherence. Political rhetoric, sensationalist media, and disinformation shape public perceptions, while Church actors often feel ill-equipped to respond strategically. Participants stressed the need not only to correct misinformation but to cultivate alternative narratives centred on dignity, encounter, and shared responsibility.
The presence of senior representatives of the French Bishops’ Conference was widely interpreted as a hopeful sign that the concerns raised may inform higher-level ecclesial reflection and future institutional action.
Looking ahead
By organising this Policy Dialogue, ACRONYM strengthened its role as a bridge between research, theology, and policy-relevant discussion. The exchange clarified concrete directions for future work, including strengthened education and training, closer interdisciplinary collaboration, improved institutional support for clergy, and sustained efforts to reshape public narratives on migration.
The Paris dialogue reaffirmed that migration is not only a policy issue, but a profound moral test—one that will continue to shape both the Church’s public voice and its credibility in contemporary European societies.
