Evangelical Leaders Call for Immigration Reform
TGC Blog | June 15, 2012
The Background: Below is the entire text of the statement as posted on the website of the Evangelical Immigration Table:Our national immigration laws have created a moral, economic and political crisis in America. Initiatives to remedy this crisis have led to polarization and name calling in which opponents have misrepresented each other's positions as open borders and amnesty versus deportations of millions. This false choice has led to an unacceptable political stalemate at the federal level at a tragic human cost.
As evangelical Christian leaders, we call for a bipartisan solution on immigration that:
• Respects the God-given dignity of every person
• Protects the unity of the immediate family
• Respects the rule of law
• Guarantees secure national borders
• Ensures fairness to taxpayers
• Establishes a path toward legal status and/or citizenship for those who qualify and who wish to become permanent residents
We urge our nation's leaders to work together with the American people to pass immigration reform that embodies these key principles and that will make our nation proud.
What it Means: The evangelical leaders who signed this statement should be lauded for attempting to find bipartisan agreement on the oft-divisive issue of immigration reform. Their articulation of Christian principles helps to provide a framework by which all evangelicals should think about the issue. Unfortunately, the statement is too vaguely worded to be of use as a guiding document on actual policy.
While almost all American evangelicals can agree on the first five principles, the sixth is so broad that it covers almost every proposed solution currently being considered---from keeping the current immigration system unchanged to complete amnesty for all residents currently living in the U.S. illegally.In fact, keeping the current immigration system largely unchanged may be the only option that harmonizes principles #2 (the unity of the immediate family), #3 (the rule of law), and #6 (a path toward legal status and/or citizenship).
Our current immigration policy is based on the Immigration Act of 1990 which set the annual limit of new immigrants into the U.S. at 700,000 and established family reunification as the main immigration criterion. Under the law, a minimum of 226,000 immigrants are allowed to become permanent residents each year under the family-sponsored preferences. Citizens and permanent residents of the U.S. are allowed to sponsor their adult children, parents, and siblings. However, the wait times for immigrants wanting to join their family are quite long.
According to data obtained from the U.S. Department of State and Department of Homeland Security, the wait time for a U.S. citizen petitioning for a brother or sister from the Philippines exceeds 20 years. A U.S. citizen petitioning for an adult son or daughter to join them can expect to wait 6 to 17 years, depending on the country or origin. Approximately 4 million people are waiting in family immigration backlogs.
Policies that give preferential legal status or citizenship to illegal residents over those who have followed the established legal procedures subverts both the rule of law and the unity of the immediate family. The only way that the issue could be resolved fairly and in accordance with all six principles would be to allow all 4 million family members on the current immigration backlog to obtain the same legal status or citizenship that would be offered to current illegal residents. Yet if we were to give amnesty to both the 4 million people on current waiting lists and the 12 million residing here illegally, the total would exceed---in one year---all of the immigrants that were processed through Ellis Island. (In comparison, the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986 granted amnesty to about 3 million immigrants.)
Since such mass immigration is politically untenable, there is no policy solution currently being proposed that can harmonize all six principles. Because of this reality, evangelicals wanting immigration reform will have to compromise or discard at least two of these "key principles" listed in the statement. We should ask those evangelical leaders who signed the statement which two they believe are dispensable.
Comments:
June 17, 2012 at 06:29 AM
And if that alien did not follow the God of Abraham then what was his plight? Immigration is not our chief concern. Our stupidity concerning our Creator and our lack of biblical knowledge is of far greater concern as to the current problems facing our nation.
June 16, 2012 at 03:13 AM
[...] Evangelical Leaders Call for Immigration Reform [...]
June 15, 2012 at 12:39 PM
For reference, the Gospel Coalition blog had two articles on immigration last month that are quite informative and relevant:
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/05/01/the-gospel-and-immigration/
http://thegospelcoalition.org/blogs/tgc/2012/05/08/immigration-policy-and-ministry/
June 15, 2012 at 11:50 AM
June 15, 2012 —WASHINGTON "Hundreds of thousands of illegal immigrants who came to the United States as children will be able to obtain work permits and be safe from deportation under a new policy announced on Friday by the Obama administration.
The policy, effective immediately, will apply to people who are currently under 30 years old, who arrived in the country before they turned 16 and have lived in the United States for five years. They must also have no criminal record, and have earned a high school diploma, remained in school or served in the military."
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/06/16/us/us-to-stop-deporting-some-illegal-immigrants.html?hp
June 15, 2012 at 11:35 AM
I think you are missing the point. The question is not "should evangelicals stand for compassionate, humane and biblical behavior toward immigrants"—we all think we should—but how best to do that. The issue is do we put the interest of one group of immigrants ahead of others or do we let everyone who wants to immigrate do so. If the latter, then we must dismantle the social safety net because it would be impossible to support for all the world's poor who would like to live in America.
June 15, 2012 at 10:38 AM
Evangelicalism suffers from an inherent flow, the need to mix rationality, other people's interest and social, economic concerns (political power and position, and capitalistic gains) together with God's Word. A nation of law cannot be exalted to the level of law = God, or else abortion would be God's will. Evangelical conservatives are still swiming in the same principles that supported Natzi Germany's rationale against jews, the 60's civil discrimination and Pharoah'zs Egypt in their view against Israel (Ex. 1). Standing for compassionate, humane and biblical behavior toward immigrants is not a man's first choice, nor a government's easy decision or practical winning social-economic practice. But God's repeated principle for this people group. They, immigrants (migrants: now documented or undocumented) have always existed and God has always spoken often regarding His will for those who come into contact with them.
June 15, 2012 at 09:50 AM
An ironically timed post given the news this morning.
June 15, 2012 at 07:44 AM
I believe I can somewhat appreciate the intent here but it is difficult to "laud" people for stating the obvious. This seems to be, to me, a rather "safe" form of posturing without revealing anyone's genuine detailed view of the matter. Maybe it is worth noting this was done but it offers just what I stated, the obvious, which is already the consensus by the majority on both political sides.
Maybe we can get some consensus on dispatching with the horrible analogous argument pitting our Lord and his family as "illegal immigrants". Now that might be "laud worthy".
June 15, 2012 at 06:27 PM
Evangelicalism suffers from an inherent flaw, the need to mix together: rationality, people's interest, social-economic concerns (political power and position, and capitalistic gains) together with God's Word. A "nation of law" cannot be exalted to the level of law = God. The argumente of "fairness" does not enter in God's commandments about how to treat the immigrant, but God's will, commands, for us to obey regarding such people group.
Magistrates (government officials and law enforcements) are "mininsters of God" as pastors are (Ro. 13). However, a state law should not be held at the level of God, for it would equally argue for abortion (legal and lawful) being God's will (We will not mentioned Natzi Germany's laws nor North Africa's apartei nor the plight of an African American man in North America's 60's).
Evangelical conservatives are still swiming in the same white water principles that supported the conditions in Natzi Germany's rationale against Jews, the 60's civil unrest, slavery's position on the part of many Christians in the South and Pharoah's Egypt' in their behavior against an immigrant, illegal race in their midst (read Ex. 1).
To stand firm on the clear compassionate, humane and biblical behavior required of us toward immigrants is not man's first choice, nor a government's best solution. Nor is it financially profitable for the economy, nor fair (asking people's opinions) nor a win-win social-economic practice. It is and was God's reveal willed as to how He wants to care for this segment of people group by His people, period. No one in Israel voted for having a tenth of their three-year taxes (tithe) to be given to the strangers. Nor was an agricultural field owner asked his business consideration of profitability in having to leave the gleannings for the stranger and not used these for further efficient profit for their business.
When God was president (or King) God laid down repeatedly principles for His people in dealing with the immigrants (strangers, alien, or the 'goer'). Immigrants have always been a people group. God has known them, and God shows His Fatherly as well as His Sovereign care of his creation and creatures, identifying these people-groups, the immigrants (migrants: now sized as documented or undocumented) and speaking as to how He wants our behavior to be towards them. One verse of many: "But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself...I am the LORD your God" (Lev. 19:34). Two points: they need to be treated as "one born among you" (the native) and "as thyself."
The one fundamental principle for resolving the Immigration debate is, and no Christian conservative has mentioned it and it embodies all the Old Testament laws depicting our behavior towards the strangers. And this principle was given by Jesus Himself, summarizing His Bible: "Whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets" (Mat. 7:12). Jesus concludes this "golden-rule" principle with the same words he does in the Two Greatest Commandments, love God and love your neighbor, "for on these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets" (Mat. 22:40). Such summaries of Scripture would go a long way to distill the right course of action.
However, some rather mix the Bible with "other" rationalistic, economic, social, tax-concerns, "fair" considerations - betraying our creed "the Bible alone is the only rule for life and faith" adorning many fine otherwise summaries of orthodox faith tenets. While any nation has the freedom (incorrectly) to disobey God's laws, the body of Christ must not think with half brain for God and the other for man's considerations. Love the stranger as thyself...as one born among you is God's only consideration inspite of economic, politics, ethical or moral condition of the immigrant as litumus test. Until the Church stands for the Gospel that made us to no longer be aliens of the covenant blessings (Eph. 2) but full citizens of God's kingdom, we, like at other times in history, will be faltering between two opinions, or combining many considerations all coming short of treating the alien as "one born among you."Evangelical Leaders Call for Immigration Reform
June 15, 2012 at 06:22 PM
This is like the unfaithful husband saying to his wife, I cannot leave the other woman until you loose weight. Lev. 19:34 is straight cut... the immigrant within, no buts, no conditions, no checking their background, no fixing some other problem. Love him as yourself, have them done what you would have like to have done to you (Mat. 7:12 - summarizing the law and the prophets).
June 15, 2012 at 05:13 PM
Thank you. I believe you just made my point, exactly. The question "how best..." is the exact example of reading what the Bible says and then mixing God's Word with another rationalistic (best, wiser consideration). An example would be best. Lev. 19:34, strangers in dwelling among you should be as a native born, and loved as yourself. The text says: "dwelling among you." Whatever we do for those coming, outside, etc. There's a compassionate, humane and biblical detemined behavior towards those here already. How best cannot include considerations that confuse the required course of action prescribed, or principlelized.
I wonder how Israel felt when they were to take the third year tithe and give to the stranger. Or what would the business owner support be when he could not go back to his field and ensure nothing was wasted, exept that God' will had prohibited gleanings to leave these for the stranger - How best to do this, and not do it...that's my point!
June 15, 2012 at 03:30 PM
Illegal immigration can never be dealt with in this nation with any seriousness until we first address the abuse of welfare.
7 Links Worth Seeing | WisdomForLife
June 30, 2012 at 06:17 AM
[...] John Roberts’s Political Decision (by Ross Douthat) [...]