How the church thinks about food has everything to do with her politics of immigration. Ruth’s story is one of gratefully receiving the other over a table of food. This is put in the context of what Patrick Deneen calls late modern liberalism’s ‘liberal anti-culture’. Foreigners in American contexts are mere items of consumption like the food we eat. We do not receive food with gratitude, so we do not receive the foreigner with gratitude. Ruth’s story is presented as a eucharistic liturgy that the church can perform, speaking blessings over foreigners as they are invited to eat a morsel of bread, take a sip of wine, and participate in community potlucks. A response follows which engages issues of multiculturalism, double-distancing of immigrants, Ruth’s contribution to the meal at the table, and the eucharist as a space-making event.

教会对食物的看法与她的移民政治息息相关。露丝的故事之一就是在一张桌子上互相接待对方。这是在帕特里克·丹宁（Patrick Deneen）称之为晚期现代自由主义的“自由反文化”的背景下提出的。在美国，外国人仅仅是我们的食物之类的消费品。我们没有收到感恩的食物，所以我们也没有收到外国人的谢意。露丝的故事表现为教会可以进行的圣体礼节，向外国人致以祝福，他们被邀请吃一点面包，喝一口酒并参加社区便餐。随之而来的回应涉及多元文化主义，移民两次疏远，露丝对餐桌上的饭菜的贡献以及圣体圣事作为造太空活动的问题。