Disclaimer: I am not an American. I am a British citizen, living legally in America on the basis of a Green Card that I acquired through a real, bona fide marriage (to my awesome wife). We have two kids, I love this country and one day I hope to become a legal citizen. In the meantime, without that assurance of citizenship, I perpetually carry with me irrational fears of being deported. As such, my opinions are undoubtedly skewed and I do not therefore pretend to be unbiased or objective about this matter.Today at Trinity I attended a special chapel session entitled "Evangelical Responses to Immigration Reform in America." The goal was to have certain key people from Trinity Evangelical Divinity School talk about how the church should engage the hot button topic of immigration reform. Specifically, participants were asked to respond to
an article that appeared in The Washington Post recently, in particular the following paragraphs:
More than 50 evangelical Christian leaders and organizations voiced their support yesterday for an immigration bill that would allow illegal immigrants to become U.S. citizens without returning to their native countries.
The statement marks a deepening split among evangelicals over immigration. It was signed by a mixture of Hispanic and white church groups. But most of the nation's large, politically influential evangelical organizations either back rival legislation that focuses on border enforcement and the deportation of illegal immigrants, or have been silent on the issue.
Hispanic evangelical leaders said yesterday that they have received support from Roman Catholic, Jewish and Muslim groups, but have been bitterly disappointed by the response of most of their fellow evangelicals, both white and black.
"This is the watershed movement -- it's the moment where either we really forge relationships with the white evangelical church that will last for decades, or there is a possibility of a definitive schism here," said the Rev. Samuel Rodriguez, president of the National Hispanic Christian Leadership Conference, which serves 10,700 Hispanic evangelical churches with 15 million members.
(If you want to read the brief letter from the 50 evangelical Christians, you can read it here:
http://www.earnedmedia.org/wr0404.htm)
Dr. Averbeck opened the session with a brief survey of passages from the Old Testament. He referenced:
Ex 22:21-24, Lev 19:18 and Deut 10:16-20. He said these are strong statements regarding God’s reaction to people who mistreat aliens/strangers/sojourners. He then said that we need to pay close attention to where God’s heart is in this issue, and how we are to treat others in society. God reacts very seriously to mistreatment of other people.
Then he continued by pointing out that there are privileges for aliens but also responsibilities for them, quoting Lev 18:26, and saying that the Bible also calls upon aliens to obey the law and to be responsible members of society.
Finally, Dr. Averbeck commented that, with regard to the two proposals in Congress; the “send-them-all-back” proposal and the “legalize-them-all” proposal (the McCain-Kennedy Bill), he felt that both options were a bit extreme and that we should look for a middle ground. As he said, “Legal responsibility and compassion for aliens are two concepts that have to be brought together somehow."
The next presenter was Dr. Priest, who informed us that the Hispanic population in the US is currently estimated at around 43 million people. He said that there are more Hispanics in the US than Spaniards in Spain, than Canadians in Canada. "The Hispanic community is an enormous part of our society and our community. Do we really understand and accept this? There are enormous challenges and hardships for a large proportion of this community, especially the children, with regards to basic health care, food, education, language, etc."
He continued, "Some people estimate that as many as 500,000 people went on short term missions trips to Latin America last year, and yet often we retreat from Latinos in our very own communities! The Latino community has been and continues to be very responsive to the gospel. There are today in the US maybe 8 to 9 million evangelical Latino believers. That is more than the Jewish community in the US."
Dr. Priest noted that the large Catholic Seminary in Mundelein requires every seminarian to be fluent in another language. He asked us, "How come evangelicals don’t stress the importance of foreign languages or cross-cultural engagement?"
He concluded by saying that credible engagement requires a deep commitment that goes beyond this issue to more learning, more relationship, more supporting, more action (as Christians), and more work in creating a place where Latinos feel welcomed and loved.
The next commentator was Dr. Cha, who opened with a story about the experiences of Japanese-Americans living in America during World War II. Dr. Cha sees many parallels between their experiences and the experiences of the Latino community today, especially the illegal immigrants. Anyone "different" is generally considered to be foreign, different, a threat.
Dr. Cha told us that Japanese American churches today often have interesting historical ties to what are now liberal or mainline denominations, because those were the only churches that opened their arms to the persecuted Japanese-Americans in the 40s and 50s. This was, Dr. Cha contends, a phenomenal missed opportunity for orthodox conservative churches who were either silent or supported persecution of “foreigners”.
Today, once again, mainline churches have stepped in to show support for the Latino community, but where are the evangelical churches? The conservative? The orthodox? The reformed?
Dr. Cha affirmed that yes, there are complicated issues involved but stressed that we need to communicate to the Latino brothers and sisters that they are not alone, that we hear their cries, that we are praying with them and for them. We want to partner with them, to help them. We cannot be silent and we cannot side with a cold, hard, "minute-men" type mentality.
Dr. Feliciano was the next speaker. Unfortunately I had a hard time following his train of thought. I think he was talking entirely off the cuff, compared to the other speakers who had prepared notes ahead of time. At least, that was the impression I got. His comments, as far as I could catch them, were:
The undocumented immigrant issue is larger even than just a Latino issue.
Often in America’s history America has treated immigrants in a …
Many immigrants have lost a sense of who they are…
Immigrants should not abandon who they are to “become American” (they should acculturate not assimilate)
Ted Haggard of the NAE, says that the NAE is “diligently working with its members to partner effectively on this matter…”
However, the SBC, NAE, NBEA, and FoF have not taken a position yet…what will hearing the gospel look like if we never break patterns of silence when we should be speaking our voices?
Not advocating openly breaking the law, but we also need to be humane in our treatment of other people…
Let us not waste this opportunity!
The US only gives out 50,000 green cards a year. If there are 11 million illegal immigrants, then how in the world are they all going to become legal workers?
Why are so many evangelicals remaining silent on this issue? We cannot ignore it and need to speak out about it.
Dr. Feliciano's most interesting point was the following question: "I wonder if the evangelical church looks at Latinos as 'landscapers and laborers' in the Christian church economy, as opposed to potential pastors and leaders and teachers?"
The last person to speak was a PhD student whose name I did not catch. His comments were also not super coherent:
Compassion and extension of gospel should be extended without discrimination
Status of who you minister to should not affect preaching the gospel
A lot of immigrants are just trying to survive, living in poverty
Many churches are/should be (?) extending hospitality in love
Education issues, health issues,
Always living in fear that the father will be deported, and then what happens to the family?
What about ethical issues of church policy – should membership be extended or not? What about leadership positions? Teaching positions?
How evangelicals respond to this will affect the way that the world church perceives of the state of American evangelicalism.
Polarizing the issue avoids the many complexities involved.
Political preferences should be submitted to Jesus for examination.
The Panel then moved to a Q&A format:
1. “Inaction is action” But, how do we navigate the many issues involved? How do we act responsibly?
Dr. F: We make decisions the same way as we make any other decisions, on an individual basis. I will participate in the march in Chicago next week, because I see this as a justice issue. But, someone else might not.
Dr. A: Read the Luke 22 passage (the “Good Samaritan”). Something does indeed need to be done. Yes, there is always a chance of being labeled in ways you might not want to be labeled. If you don’t want to get into trouble, stay home.
Dr. Priest: Evangelicals think selectively and we haven’t been thinking about the Latino population well at all. We’re coming to the table late in the game.
2. (inaudible question)
Dr. Cha: 13-15% of undocumented immigrants are from Asian countries. And what about the ethical issues of supporting free trade through NAFTA but not free movement of people?
Dr. Priest: The judgments we make need to be based on the human dimensions. We should not make the assumption that all law is God-given and good. The law can cause problems and pain and suffering.
3. If we don’t hold the line, aren’t we encouraging illegal action?
Dr. Priest: We are not talking about individuals, but family groups, children in school, legal children of illegals etc.
PhD student: For most illegals, they say, “Give me a process whereby I can get legalized, because the existing process is impossible.” This is not just about a free ride for people, or a chance to cut in line, but for most people there is an honest desire to seek a real way to become legal, to follow laws that are actually “followable”
Dr. F: Past behavior predicts future behavior. History shows that Latino segment is largest growing sector of America and they are facing the same problems the Irish community faced, Polish faced etc. etc. We have a system that seeks to regulate this issue, but it is broken. We are SO privileged that so many people want to come here. By the way, how weird is it that so many Americans are going abroad for health care today?
4. What implications are there for the church if we remain silent?
Dr. A: Well, that sounds a bit like a rhetorical question. With regard to the future, the US must retain control of its borders. This issue is not a simple question. Complications have to be confronted head-on because the Bible clearly teaches compassion.
Dr. Cha: Immigration is not just a US problem. Western Europe is having big problems as a result of failed immigration policies. There are all sorts of problems with guest worker visas creating a “second-tier” of citizenship among people. No nation has ever been able to deal with immigration in a way that has proven to be effective. Biblically this is a moral issue. Finding a Biblical, ethical and legal solution would be a great gift to many people around the world.
My personal opinion is that sending people home and making illegal immigration a felony are just horrible, horrible ideas. Because I am not a citizen, I find myself getting very passionate about this problem, and the various proposed solutions. I had a severe reaction to a congressman from Indiana I heard on Moody Bible Radio a few weeks ago saying that he felt deep down that it was "the right thing to do" to deport all the illegal immigrants. He tried to sound compassionate and had just finished talking about his faith and how important prayer was for him. But I couldn't understand how someone, anyone, could honestly say that they just saw mass deportations as the best solution to this problem. It really got me going.
But... then I realized something. As passionately as I feel about this issue, there are equally passionate people with completely opposing views. How in the world do I process that? Furthermore, the zeal that I feel, the absolute conviction that I am right, equals the passion and zeal that homosexuals have for defending gay marriage, or abortion rights activists have for defending “a woman’s right to choose.” Zeal, passion, intensity by themselves cannot therefore be the final arbiters of what is right. So how do we determine a right course of action?
One thing I am curious about is why are prominent evangelicals so quick to jump into politics in order to “defend marriage” or oppose abortion, but not so quick to jump in on the side of compassion and sanity in support of America’s massive population of illegal immigrants?
Why get involved in those issues and not this one?
Or, conversely, for people like me, why get involved in this issue and not those issues?
Why is it that I would gladly and willingly march for this moral issue but I would never march for those moral issues?
What should govern WHAT we do or do not get involved in?
I wonder, is it easier being
for something as opposed to
against something? That is, it is easier to argue for more rights, more freedom, more of anything than it is to say we need less of something, more restrictions? Does that impact what issues people get worked up over?
Well these are all unanswerable questions I suppose.
I'll end by saying that it is deeply disturbing to me that no prominent evangelicals have really stood up in support of the immigrant community. I admire the folks who signed the letter above, but with all due respect to them, they are not really the movers and shakers of American evangelicalism. I admire what they did, and it's a great start. But until the big guns weigh in on the matter, evangelicals will be perceived to have dropped the ball on this issue.
One more question - what about all the churches that have services en espanol? Why are they not commenting?
I should note that in all fairness I did hear a prominent evangelical (Chuck Colson) talk about immigration recently, but his line of argument was so ridiculous I honestly couldn't take him seriously. He suggested, with a straight face, that the immigration problem would not be a problem if abortion wasn't legal in America. After all, he argued, if abortion was illegal, then there would be millions more Americans to do all those menial jobs the immigrants currently do! This is honestly what he said. His solution - make abortion illegal.
Just goes to show that some conservative evangelicals are completely obsessed with abortion and homosexuality to the absolute detriment of every other issue. Sigh.
