- I believe in secure borders and that every nation has the right and responsibility to secure its own borders. I have traveled all over the world and if I don’t have the proper passport/visa, then I fully expect to be detained and jailed if I am trying to enter a country illegally. I am not debating that.
- The current immigration situation and political debate is important, but it is not the main thing right now when it comes to these children. Why have they come? What is President Obama’s responsibility? What happens if they stay? All of these questions are secondary. In some of my training on development work, I have learned that you have to differentiate between disaster response and development work. Disaster response is what you do when the hurricane or earthquake has hit. You help everyone you can and provide aid, food, shelter, and comfort. You don’t ask questions. You just help. Development work is what you do when there is an ongoing problem. You look for long-term solutions and you are careful not to create dependency. There is a completely different metric at work. The situation with the children at the border is “disaster” not “development.” The long term immigration problem is “development.” So, different problems lead to different solutions.
- We have to differentiate between the political debate in Washington over immigration and the actual children in need right now. News erupted today in Alabama that immigrant children were headed to Maxwell AFB in my city of Montgomery. The report proved to be premature, but response from many in Alabama was that we do not want them here. Our own Congresswoman Martha Roby released a statement saying that the children were not wanted under any circumstances at Maxwell. The question that I have for Congresswoman Roby is, “does caring for children in need temporarily pose a national security threat to America? Does it make our nation weaker or stronger?” She is representing the view of many of her constituents in Alabama who have made their voice heard today saying, “Send the children away! They are not our problem!”
- I am not suggesting that the children should stay in America or that they should never be sent home. Rep. Roby says that we should “send them home with care.” What does that mean? If Lackland AFB in Texas, where many of the children are, is overwhelmed (as are other facilities), then is it not caring for the children to put them in good environments for a time until we can figure out what to do with them? I do not think that they should just be unleashed upon America with no families or support structure, but should they not be compassionately cared for now, until we can find permanent solutions?
31 “When the Son of Man comes in his glory, and all the angels with him, he will sit on his glorious throne. 32 All the nations will be gathered before him, and he will separate the people one from another as a shepherd separates the sheep from the goats. 33 He will put the sheep on his right and the goats on his left.
34 “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’
40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’
The least of these are at our borders and Jesus says to us that what we do for them is what we do for Him. American Evangelicals have had a difficult year or two where the country has declared to us that we are not wanted and our religion is irrelevant. What if Jesus is giving us a chance to show that worshiping Christ changes us and causes us to not just think about our own “way of life,” but to also look after the interests of others? What if we are being given a chance to do “for one of the least of these” to demonstrate our love for Christ in a tangible way? Will we recognize the day of our visitation?
What if we are in an Isaiah 1:16-17 moment where God says to the people:
Wash and make yourselves clean.
Take your evil deeds out of my sight;
stop doing wrong.17Learn to do right; seek justice.Defend the oppressed.Take up the cause of the fatherless;plead the case of the widow.
6“Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen:
to loose the chains of injustice
and untie the cords of the yoke,
to set the oppressed free
and break every yoke?
7Is it not to share your food with the hungry
and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter—
when you see the naked, to clothe them,
and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?
8Then your light will break forth like the dawn,
and your healing will quickly appear;
then your righteousness will go before you,
and the glory of the Lord will be your rear guard.
9Then you will call, and the Lord will answer;
you will cry for help, and he will say: Here am I.
“If you do away with the yoke of oppression,
with the pointing finger and malicious talk,
10and if you spend yourselves in behalf of the hungry
and satisfy the needs of the oppressed,
then your light will rise in the darkness,
and your night will become like the noonday.
11The Lord will guide you always;
he will satisfy your needs in a sun-scorched land
and will strengthen your frame.
You will be like a well-watered garden,
like a spring whose waters never fail.
12Your people will rebuild the ancient ruins
and will raise up the age-old foundations;
you will be called Repairer of Broken Walls,
Restorer of Streets with Dwellings.
What would Jesus say about our attitude toward children in need? That is what matters.
There is a common term in the field of emergency medicine: “violence of action.” It’s not as harmful or uncaring as it may sound at first. It simply means that you do whatever is necessary, as uncomfortable as it may immediately seem, to address the most urgent issue at hand. If for example a man’s leg has been amputated, you don’t start by shoving antibiotics down his throat and assuring him that, with rehabilitation, he will come to cope with the loss of his limb. No! You start by putting a tourniquet on the limb to stop the bleeding so that he doesn’t bleed out and die.
This analogy is important to keep in mind when we consider the border crisis. Yes, we need to strengthen our diplomacy with these other nations so that their citizens don’t, out of desperation, take it upon themselves to deport themselves to our country. Yes, we need to do all that we can to make sure that people aren’t putting their children in harm’s way and, in many cases, making them vulnerable to sex trafficking and many other abuses in the transit between their home countries and ours. Yes, we need to make it easier for law-abiding citizens who genuinely love and desire to improve conditions the United States to become citizens. Yes, we need to honor the widow and the orphan.
All of these things are important, but are not immediately pertinent to the border crisis. While our hearts bleed for these children, the fact remains that we do not have the resources (long-term) to care for them. Eventually, we will bleed out, economically-speaking. We cannot take this burden upon ourselves as a nation. We must put a tourniquet on the border. We must stop the bleeding. Until we do that, any other efforts are as useless as prescribing psycho-therapy to a man who bleeding out from a severed limb. The therapy is important, but the bleeding is the most immediate concern.
Q. How can churches best ‘minister’ to illegal immigrants at the border?
A. (1) We can work with authorities to rescue children from horrific sex trafficking situations.
(2) We can work to get the border shored up and get the word out that anyone who crosses our border illegally will be immediately deported, ensuring that many who would come here will not take the risk.
(3) We can feed them and give them a glass of water.
(4) We can help to address any medical, emotional, and spiritual needs they may have.
(5) We can share the gospel of grace, faith and, yes, repentance with them.
(6) We can help them to understand that this repentance includes respect for the laws of the land, including immigration laws.
(7) We can help them to understand that evidence of true repentance precedes baptism (i.e. church membership).
(8) We can put more time, effort, and money toward missions in Mexico and Central America, with an emphasis not only on conversion but also on discipleship.
This is not a very popular message, but it is biblical. Paul sent the slave Onesimus back to his master Philemon after feeding him, physically and spiritually. It was only right. We must do the same.
Repsonding to your post here William.
1) We can’t enforce our own laws, how are we to deal with the sex trafficking industry that has it’s roots in the nations where these children are coming from?
2) Agree we should do this, don’t think it happens. Politics prevail
3) They are not going anywhere, so how does this meet the long term needs they will have?
4) Again, these will be long term situations
5) Absolutely, the greatest mission field in our nation now resides at our southern border. While they are here, I believe long term, will we make disciples of them? How can this happen apart from the church?
6) Agree, so does that mean the 6 year old must return to their drug infested, cartel run, murder saturated, impoverished, sex trafficking country in order to repent? Or do we love them and take them in as the church as Jesus most surely would if the government allows?
7) Sure, we should do that for anyone
8) Yep, and those future missionaries are at our border right now
William, you 8 steps are fine and are a good response. Why do you think that these are things that anyone here would be against? If we engage in this way, then we will be helping and supporting these children, which is all that I am calling for.
But, since we have no power to return the children home or not, then if they are selected to stay here for a while, I think that we should minister in that context too and not turn our back on them – which is not something that you are saying.
Thank you for your 8 steps. If you get a chance to enact them, then go for it.
Alan, I wrote a similar blog the other day. Agree 100% we must secure the border. I also agree we must separate ourselves as the church in looking at this, in the spirit of Matthew 25 as you cited, rather than dealing with it through the eyes of a nation. I look across our land and see tens of millions of people who profess Christ giving billions upon billions of dollars in His name. I then look at the multitudes of cathedrals we worship in with millions budgeted for sound systems and other things that are to enhance “our” experience. And at the border I see desperate need, that I believe will be long term, as I have zero confidence in the government to deal with this is a satisfactory way. It is an opportunity for us to truly live out the words of Christ. The question is, are we willing? Willing to cross denominational lines, putting aside differences, and pulling together in the name of Christ for the cause of Christ. Willing to sacrifice for the “least of these.” Willing to make our faith about others instead of ourselves. I believe this is a test for the church in America. Are we willing to put His money and our efforts in to the desperate need of innocent children? To truly unite as His body? We need to think about this as the church, not Americans. I personally believe that is these children’s true hope. In the culture of todays church it seems almost impossible, but that’s exactly where God will show up mightily. Looking at this through mans eyes will not resolve this, only through His
If the powers that be would allow the US citizens to take the children into their homes, the 53 thousand children would be swallowed up in a matter of a few months. There are US citizens who would give anything for a child to raise. There is only a crisis in a couple of places, and that’s where the children are congregated.
We as a nation can spend trillions on an unfunded war, and can we not take care of 53,000 children. Shucks, I would love to have one or two children myself.
Taking these children into our homes would only send the message that it is beneficial for them to make this incredibly dangerous trip. It would result in more children dying or being taken up into sex trafficking. We must send them back. Period.
Anything less would be inhumane.
William, you really believe we’re going to stop 3rd world countries from sending us their children when we can’t even secure our own borders? They are coming, and will continue to come. The question is what do we do with those here, now. You really believe we’ll be deporting 60k children? 90k come September by all estimates. Yes, secure the border, that’s what stops this. But what do with these here, now. They are not adults, they are not slaves, and where they come from is no place for a child
I have already stated what to do with those here now. I gave 8 things we can do with them. And yes, we can secure our border. We just choose not to. I would fully disagree with you about them not being slaves. They most certainly are. Many of the children are sex slaves. Our law-enforcement agencies have been dealing with an increase of sex traffickers from Mexico and Central America here in Texas for months now. Those that are not sex slaves are virtually cheap-labor slaves in many of our Southern states. Southern Democrat and establishment Republican ranchers and small business owners actively seek cheap labor illegals to fill the gap left by nineteenth-century slaves and modern-day, lazy, aristocratic, spoiled teenagers. There is nothing compassionate about using these children in this way. Nothing has changed in recent years regarding the conditions in the home-countries of these children. The only thing that has changed is the fact that we have ceased to enforce our immigration laws. And don’t tell me we can’t build a fence. If China could build a wall along the mountainous Mongolian border centuries ago, we can find a way in our modern, ultra-technological era to build a secure fence-line along a fairly level border the stretch of which is a fraction of the China / Mongolia border. The border is not secure, because our representative government in Washington doesn’t want it secure.
William, I’m not saying we couldn’t secure our border. I’m saying we won’t. The Hispanic voting block is to large and influential. We’re going to continue to pass the buck. As for them being sex slaves. Where do you think this is happening? Where they are coming from. So we return them to that? To the drug cartels that are doing this? Where the murder rate is 20 times what it is here. As an American, I agree, secure the border at all costs, not that I believe that happens. So we are left with the question. They are here, I don’t believe they are going anywhere, so who steps up and fills the needs? The church is these childrens hope
So, we are to aid and abed lawlessness? I don’t think so. That is not the role of the church in society, even if the governing authorities are themselves lawless.
William, I agree with Jeff here,… the US Leadership will not enforce the law at the border, and seem to be willing to allow folks to enter at will. Some get caught, others don’t, and the President is clearly not in favor of stopping the illegals at the border.
So, it does appear to be an opportunity for the church,..to minister, and help with food, etc. Certainly the church should follow the law, but wow, what an opportunity to share the good news of Christ.
Who are more vulnerable to sex-trafficking: children at home under the care of their parents, or children on an international trek to a foreign land without the protective umbrella of their parents? The situation that allowed for the brothels that are daily cropping up in Texas is the increase of illegal migration of unaccompanied minors.
Chris,
I’ve stated as much. We should give them a cup of water and the gospel. The gospel that we preach, though, should be one of both faith AND repentance. How would you guys propose we deal with illegal immigrants who are unrepentant of their illegal migration who simultaneously desire to be baptized into the body of Christ?
William,…I see your point. We may not have a problem once the President assigns them as refugees. But, for now, sharing the gospel, food, water, and speak to them about the law is a good thing. It is unfortunate that we as citizens have to put up with an inept President and the cost of the whatever he decides we should pay. Very sad scenario indeed.
William,
With passion I disagree.
Jess, agree completely. A unified church saying we’ll take them. I see no way the government says no. And if they by chance did, we still did the right thing
I have yet to hear or see anyone suggest they do not want to deal with these children. When states and counties refuse to take them, neither is that saying it either. It is unfair and wrongheaded to assume the worst of states and counties who refuse to take these children on. The unexpected strain on the budgets of these areas is just unrreasonable.
What must be also acknowledged is that while the maintream media is reporting this invasion as being mostly children, that is false reporting. The largest part of these people are in fact adults. What must also be acknowledged is that what is best for children is to be with their parents regardless of economic distress.
There are some things that should and should not happen here. First, we should care for the immediate needs of these people, children and adults alike. The federal government (not local counties and state agencies) should set up receiving centers along the border where we can see to the needs of these people (children and adults both).
Second, once their immediate needs are met we need to ship them back directly to where they came from. This will stop the invasion in its tracks.
We are not in an either or scenario. We can do multiple things at one time. It is not that we have to ship them all over the country to see to their needs, and then work on the political issues nvolved. We can do it all at the same time.
Mark, that is the contrast in views. You are looking at it as what will the government do. I am looking at it as to what the church should do. Honestly, do you truly have confidence the government is going to handle this situation? Our government has refused to secure the borders which led to this. They do, they tick off a large, influential block of voters. Politics has crippled the government. What of the church?
Jeff,
I have listed 8 steps. I would argue they are the biblical response the church should have. How would you respond to those 8 steps?
The government has already so badly bungled this that they have by passed the church. At this point unless the feds step back a bit and make room for the church to come and and help it is virtually impossible to do that. There is a political agenda at play here and the church would interfere with that.
True, Mark. When U.S. congressmen are turned away from holding facilities, why do we think we would be able to gain any easier access? I hadn’t thought of that.
William, because we have God, if we stand together. It won’t be the SBC, the AOG, the PCA, the UMC or any other denomination that addresses this. It will have to be all who claim Jesus as Savior and Lord. This is exactly why I believe this is a test for the “American” church
And I agree with than Mark, so it will take a unified church, standing together to force the governments hand. Even if we fail, we have done the right thing
The church is not going to force the governments hand. Like he did with the ranchers Obama will send military force after anyone who opposes him.
What we also need to consider is that this invasion is a result of the drug cartels in Mexico who are making huge bucks off of this. There are a number of Sheriffs in our country with a price on their head by the Mexican Drug Cartels because of their stand on this issue.
This whole thing is so complicated it just is not as simple as the church coming together.
Mark, couldn’t disagree more. A denomination, no. His church? If the gates of hell won’t prevail against it, neither will our government
Mark
You raise a very valid point. It is not a simplistic issue with a simplistic answer.
As far as a united church front, that argument starts with “if”. If the churches unite, that is a big “if”. When has this ever occurred. We lost abortion, we lost the gay issue, Why would we unite for this?
D.L., I agree, it’s a huge if. But isn’t it about time? Isn’t it time for His body to work as one? We’ve lost the cultural wars precisely for this reason. Is their any who would argue that this would be God’s desire? One body as He describes us. Hey, I know I’m a dreamer, but I also know “with God all things are possible.” We are sadly a people of little faith in too many areas, looking to the government to solve problems instead of God and each other. Their is a solution, we just have to humble ourselves and do what God would have us do. Why is it we never see our major denominational leaders, those of us who preach the biblical Jesus and the biblical gospel, fight these battles together? Stand as one? With one voice? Heck, we in the SBC can’t even work together in our own hometowns as effectively as we should because we’re afraid of somone stepping in to our territory. It’s really sad when you think about it
Jeff
I certainly do not disagree. And yes, it is about time.
I’m glad the Native Americans allowed our forefathers into this country. I cannot add anymore to this statement. You all would do well to listen to Jeff.
Actually, that’s a pretty terrible analogy. Consider what the intruders did to those who were already here.
Chris, with the many nefarious characters we can be sure have already crossed our borders along with these children, maybe the analogy isn’t completely out of line. Sad, but true
I meant terrible in terms of trying to convince people.
Jess, you don’t have to look to the Native Americans. Look at the Mexican border: no, not the Rio Grande, but back in the early 1800s, when the border was the Sabine River on the west side of Louisiana, and Texas was a Mexican province. It was Americans pouring across that eventually pushed the border back to the Nueces River, and finally to the Rio Grande.
How quickly we forget.
It is difficult to differentiate between out political conclusions and Biblical ones; difficult, but necessary.
John
Even for those who want to send the children back (which might be the best approach), you still have to process the children and care for them while you do so – unless your idea of “sending them back” is dropping them off in the desert on the other side of the Rio Grande at the end of a 30 minute bus ride.
Assuming that no one means that, then the only way to effectively “send them home” is to go through some kind of processing. They need to be cared for while that happens. We need room to do that. The border facilities are overwhelmed as it is and there are kids basically sitting in holding cells with very little.
I am not talking about long-term solutions here. I am talking about the initial response of Christians in THIS country right now. How do you respond to children in need showing up on your front porch? You try to help them and figure out what to do.
Now, what does “help” look like? It could be a lot of things. But, meeting a group of kids on a bus with signs saying “Go Home!” is not one of the options if you are a follower of Christ.
IF the children come to our city of Montgomery, Alabama, our church will do what we can to welcome them. We will work with other churches as well. We will work through the proper channels and do what we can. We will also oppose those who want to tell these children that they are not welcome. Long term solutions are out of our hands at that point, but we can be the hands and feet of Jesus.
One other thing: American Christians really need to get over the idea that their opinion on every issue is their vote or their Constitutional duty. What I mean by that is that if you are an American Christian and you have an opportunity to help feed and clothe a hungry, hurting child from another country, I am really not sure how much your personal view on the whole immigration issue matters – unless you are a Congressional Representative, a Senator, or the President of the United States. If you aren’t one of those 536 people, then perhaps you should just help the kid out and do what you can to show them the love of Jesus. Your opinion won’t really change anything in the short-term. It will just make you feel better as you go back to your house.
Now, if we are talking about long-term solutions and the big-picture immigration problem, then by all means. Pontificate away and contact your Representative and vote according to your convictions in the mid-term elections. But, still give a cup of cold water and the gospel to all that you meet. Your primary citizenship is in heaven.
If a needy child showed up at my doorstep, the absolute first thing I would do would not be to welcome them into my home. I would try to return them to their proper guardians.
I would further argue that the signs and protesting has more to do with sending a message to our representatives in Washington than anything else. You cannot prove that the majority of the people on those buses are children and, even if they are, I guarantee you they can’t read English. It is not my church’s job, nor my community’s job, to harbor people who are breaking the law of the land, no matter how old they are. I would appreciate it if people would get down off their moral high-horses and stop telling us that it is.
I would support my church’s effort to feed and minister to illegals, but not if it meant that my church’s support was a demonstration that we condoned illegal activity. I would be devastated to find out that our church housed and fed a man and his three daughters for a time just to later discover that he was a pimp and they were his three underage sex-slaves. I don’t condone blind, ignorant acts of naive kindness to potential terrorists, pimps, and prostitutes. Even if they are not potential criminals in those senses, we know that they are all lawbreakers in regard to our immigration laws.
You keep saying it’s all about the kids. I will not stand shoulder to shoulder with the pimps, smugglers, and politicians who are victimizing these children and act like we are all serving the same cause here. The border needs to be closed, and that’s the end of it.
William,
Where is the Christian compassion. The first thing I would do is to welcome them into my home and then after they are warmed and filled, I would try to find the guardians.
I think we are making something complicated out of something simple.
I was hungry and you gave me no meat, I was thirsty and you gave me no drink. If you didn’t do this to the least of these you didn’t do it unto me.
I disagree. I think you are way oversimplifying something that is quite complicated. If it were as simple as you say, I would agree with you that we should simply feed and clothe them. However, it is not so simple. There are a host of questions not being asked.
1) Will we only be feeding and clothing the under-aged?
2) If indeed those minors are being used for profit by pimps and smugglers, are we not subsidizing meals that would otherwise have to be paid for by the thugs who are profiting off of these children?
3) If we aid and comfort those who come now, how are we helping to dissuade those who would similarly put themselves at risk to make the same trek?
4) Why do you assume that we would be provided access to these children, when U.S. Representatives are not even being allowed to tour holding facilities in their own states?
There are myriad other questions that could be asked. Long-story-short, this is not simple. Not in the least.
This is all extremely naive.
My Christian compassion, and my Christian wisdom, will not allow me to support these criminal enterprises.
Be as gentle as doves, but wise as serpents.
Jess, I think James said it best. “if a brother or sister is naked and desititute of daily food, and one of you says, ‘Depart in peace, be warmed and filled, but you did not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit.” I believe James called that a dead, useless faith
Jeff, apparently you give money (or food and clothes) to every guy you see on the street waving a sign. Is that what you are saying? James is writing to believers by the way.
Nope, actually Nate, I’ve done this. As in many towns our exit ramps off of interstates are sometimes clustered with folks holding such signs. I’ve bought squeeges for them, buckets and made them signs saying will wash windshield for 2 dollars. They’ve been thrown back in my face. I’ve offered to take them to shelters. By and large they refuse, it wasn’t good enough for them. Had one guy recently insist I buy him a bus ticket. I refused. But those are adults, and adults many times make poor choices and really don’t want help but a handout. These are children, surely you can see the difference
And Nate, I’m aware who James is wrtiting too. You saying we’re only to aid each other as believers when their is a legit need? We have a simple rule. Don’t enable a person who can provide for themselves but refuses, but if the need is legit, you help any way you can. Sometimes folks fool you, it happens, but that isn’t on us. And again, we’re speaking of kids, not adults
Jeff, my point was you pick and choose. You don’t (unless you tell me otherwise) give to every single guy you see.
Not every adult Nate, that’s for sure, and I don’t see anyone advocating that. But children? Seriously, you see a child alone on a street corner, you’re not going to at least stop and see what’s going on? Here we have children 1500 miles from a hellish home, many unattended by an adult, with no way of providing shelter, food clothing for themselves. You telling me we should not do everything we can to see they are cared for, loved and protected? To meet needs just as James says, and not just say, “O’ hey, good luck, we’ll pray for ya.” We have to differentiate this crisis from the larger immigration problem, which we the church cannot solve. We can go above and beyond for these children, and any child, in need. We need to deal, as much as possible and is allowed, with the reality on the ground. It ticks me off the feds are shipping them all over the country and we can’t find out where, so as to help
Hey William, we get it. You think when Jesus said to feed and clothe the poor, the alien, the prisoner, and the stranger He really meant treat them like a criminal and teach them to obey a legal statute they are ignorant of and don’t understand.
Thank you for making your views clear.
Now might I suggest that you go and read Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John and see if you can find a verse or two that agree with your interpretation. I have a feeling we will be waiting a long time for you to post after that.
Your callous disregard for scripture in the name of making a political point is deeply troubling. These people coming across the border are just that people. They are made in God’s image and they are fleeing unimaginable horrors that you and I and our kids would never dream of. They are coming not as an invading force- the term “invasion” you insist on using is inciting to the point of nausea- but as people fleeing into uncertainty in the face of certain death, rape, or forced involvement in the illegal drug trade. They are coming from Honduras and El Salvador and other Central American cointries where law has failed and the criminals own the streets. They are sent by desperate parents who know they are sending their kids where they cannot go and that they may never see them again.
Sir, have you no heart of compassion for these people? Sir, have you no brokenness for their suffering and misery? Do you not see the evil in children who have already endured so much being greeted by mobs of angry people screaming in words that they cannot understand but whose faces are anything but joyful and welcoming?
Our God made it very clear how we are to treat the aliens and strangers among us. Our crucified and risen Savior said that the mark of one of His sheep is how they treat those in need. Further, He said that when we do with kindness unto one of those we do it into Him. He also said that when we refuse to serve someone in need we have refused to serve Him. Would you greet Jesus, sir, with a sign telling Him to go home and a screaming voice crying for his immediate return to danger and death?
I didn’t think so.
You are asking me and my church to support with my money and resources what I understand to be tantamount to human smuggling and sex trafficking, activity that has resulted in the importation of hundreds of violent criminals, drug dealers, pimps, and under-aged prostitutes. It is not a “political” issue for me, sir. It is a Christian, humanitarian issue. I see this position as the compassionate one. The government wants them here. They want them to brave the journey, often risking life and / or freedom to get to America. I do not see your cause as compassionate, and I will not support it. To aid and abed this atrocity is wrong. I don’t just believe our government is wrong. I believe churches who support this without proper, thorough inquiry are wrong too. However, I don’t think churches have the resources or the access to conduct a proper, thorough inquiry in every case.
William, the “guardians” of these children aren’t sending these kids here because of our porous borders or the American dream. They are being sent here because where they are from is no place for a child. I’ve not seen one person here say the border shouldn’t be closed, but until it is, what? Send an innocent child, and yes, they are innocents in this, back to a place where their parents who most of whom we can be sure loved them were willing to do whatever it took to get them out of there? Lord help us
Jeff,
I’d like to see where you are getting your information.
What information William? That these children are innocents and not criminals? That their parents may actually love them? That the countries they are coming from are out of control? This mass exodus of children all at once is a recent development. Our borders have been porous for years, and the American dream has always been here, so what is this latest desperate motivation where we see tens of thousands of parents sending tens of thousands of children off alone on such a dangerous trek?
William, here is some real info:
From Honduras: 593% increase in border apprehensions, #1 murder rate in the world. Top reason stated for leaving; gang violence fueled by drugs
From Guatemala: 416% increase in border apprehensions, #2 murder rate in the world. Top reason stated for leaving; gang violence fueled by drugs
From El Salvador: 330% increase in border apprehensions, #5 murder rate in the world. Top reason stated for leaving; gang viloence fueled by drugs.
Sources: US Customs and Border Protection, Wall Street Journal, ABC News
Alan,
The most balanced, biblical, compassionate, sensitive, informative and Kingdom-minded response that I’ve come across on this subject. Well done. Thanks for taking the time to write this.
Many of us are theologically and practically working through this issue; particularly those of us who live in states(Texas) where this concern is a present reality. Your post has been/is extremely helpful toward that end. Thanks again.
Thank you, Dwight. I have lots of ideas on solving the long-term problem. I went to Washington, DC last October to lobby for just those long-term solutions and met with my Congresswoman, Representative Roby, to make the case. But, that is not the issue now. Now, we have children in need and it is a different situation. We should meet the immediate need first, and from that that position, then address the long-term problems with moral clarity.
Agree 100% Allen. And I strongly do believe we need to be planning long term with a realistic perspective that many if not most of these children will not be deported. This is an American issue, but it is more importantly a challenge to our faith. We must separate the 2 at this juncture, and I believe we’ll have to do so long term to truly see this issue begin to be addressed. The church can’t seal the border. The church can’t police Central America. But the church can “suffer the little children.”
Brother Dwight, for those of you on the ground in Texas, you are at ground zero. I encourage all of you who follow Christ in Texas to join together and lead our nation in dealing with these children. Alan was so right in his OP, this is an opportunity from heaven that could stir the embers of revival, if the church responds as Christ would have us do. Being in Texas, that direction and focus will most probably begin there. Our prayers are with you.
“The church can’t seal the border. The church can’t police Central America. But the church can ‘suffer the little children.'”
Jeff, so well said! If you don’t mind, I am going to borrow that and use it in the future. I don’t know you, so I can’t quote you, but I am writing now to give you credit and say “Thank you!” You said in 19 words what I tried to say in 2,000+! Thank you!
Alan, you can quote me 🙂 not that it would carry any weight, lol. I quoted one of your blogs a while back, with full credit. I emailed you for permission but never heard back, so I used it anyway. Better to ask for forgiveness than wait for permission 😉 It fit to well in my sermon not to use. And I’m rarely praised for my brevity, so I’ll take that too!!!
Jeff, sorry I missed the email! But, repost all you like. I never ask permission to repost – I just give a HT and link back.
I am done here. I think I have said all that can be said. I would simply urge wisdom and discretion in moving forward. This is not a simple issue. Humanitarian effort does not always mean you feed and clothe the person. If a man and his three daughters comes to my house in the middle of the night seeking food, clothing, and a place to stay for the night, and I know that there are men smuggling little girls through my neighborhood for the purpose of prostitution, I don’t just open up my home without proper inquiry simply because Jesus said to feed and give water. That would be foolishness to the extreme.
William, you said the same thing about 20 times. We get it.
The idea that every child coming to our border is a criminal or is part of some kind of nefarious plot against the United States is a bit foreign to me. What I am advocating is that once the children have been taken into detention, that churches try to find ways to minister to them. Even if they are criminals, Jesus told us to visit those in prison and how we treat those in prison shows how we see Him. Last time I checked, those in prison were those who have broken the law. So, ministering to lawbreakers still falls within the commands of our Lord and expresses the heart of God. I am a lawbreaker too – and so are you – of God’s laws, which are higher than man’s. So, we all need love and mercy even as we submit to the laws of the state to carry out its own purposes.
The reason I’ve said the same thing 20 times is because you don’t get it. You guys keep paraphrasing me as saying things that are completely foreign to my point. The straw men you guys are making out of my points are insulting. They demonstrate that you are unwilling to engage my arguments, so you rephrase them to make it seem as though I am just some kind of heartless monster who could care less for the kids being trafficked. That is the farthest thing from what I have written here. Can I disagree without being villainized?
William, so all of these kids are being trafficked?
Again, more misdirection through reinterpreting what I’ve said. Why don’t you just interact with my actual words without trying to paraphrase me. That would be more honest.
William, no one is villainizing you. You don’t need to act persecuted. We are calling you out for a position that is inconsistent with the gospel.
I just read on Foxnews.com that MS-13 is infiltrating placement centers in Arizona and are recruiting preteen kids to work for them. If the Church is absent, other forces will come in. Even if they are teen criminals, why would we not seek to take the gospel to them and show them sacrificial love? We are commanded to visit those in prison, even, not to mention children in need.
No one is persecuting you. You came hot and heavy into this post with well over 20 comments addressing every thing you could think of, telling people to get off their spiritual high horse, giving us your 8 point plan and then, if questioned, referring back to your 8 point plan as though it is authoritative.
I am not interested in villainizing you. I just think that you are wrong on this. We should care for the weakest of those among us in the immediate sense and then, from there, figure out what is best for these children. If you are a 20 year old man and snuck in, I am not opposed to taking you back across the border and dropping you off somewhere. You should be able to fend for yourself. I am opposed to doing that for a 10 year old kid. I honestly don’t understand how we are in disagreement here.
Again, long-term issues are not being addressed here. But even if you are goings to take them back to Hondourus, you still need to process them and figure out where they are going and what will happen to them. We aren’t just sticking a parachute on them and doing an air drop.
I have worked in disaster relief situations. It is incredibly complicated. Things take time and care is needed in the meantime while things are worked out. That is what I am calling for.
“William, no one is villainizing you. . . We are calling you out for a position that is inconsistent with the gospel.”
I’ve yet to see how, without rephrasing me to say what I have not said, anyone has even attempted to demonstrate how the measures I’ve proposed are against the gospel. No one has even interacted with them. They simply ignore them and act as though I want to “parachute” people back into Central America. This is not at all what I’ve said. Rather, it is simply how you are reading me.
“Even if they are teen criminals, why would we not seek to take the gospel to them and show them sacrificial love?”
Again, you have not read my comments correctly. I have called for that! Whatever. Paint me however you want.
William, I answered all 8, right underneath them
William, all that I am advocating for is helping children in need who are right in front of us. That is what you seem to be struggling with. If you want to have a discussion on how to fix the immigration problem, that is great. But, the purpose of this post is a call to help children in need and being the hands and feet of Jesus to them.
Turning children away is where the problem is. You say that you want to return them. That might be the best option. But, the point of my post is that if the children show up in your town, what will you try to do to help first – before they get sent back? All of that is out of your hands anyway.
I am talking about what we can do, not what politicians in Washington will decide. The position that you seem to have that is inconsistent with the gospel is your focus on turning the kids away without providing them help. If that is not what you are saying, then I am glad and am happy to be corrected.
Jeff,
You responded to them, but you did not demonstrate how they are against the gospel.
Alan,
I am saying that I want to help children, but I will not put myself and my community in a situation in which we are committed to long-term care, or care that results these children simply getting sifted into the framework of our society without proper integration and assimilation. That is cultural suicide, and I will not have any part of it. It would not be loving to my neighbor, and it would not be honoring to my governing authorities, even if my governing authorities have no honor. I want to help, but I will only do so if I know that by helping I am not doing more harm.
Care for them in the present.
Share the gospel with them.
Obey the law.
I can argue all day that the borders need to be secure (I believe it) but if the church does not act when thousands of children are in this kind of situation – without regard to politics or borders or any of that – then we are not the church.
Well then, someone needs to get a commission together and propose some specifics. I’d like to see the outcome. Hopefully the vitriol, condemnation, and condescension of fellow believers in the resulting proposals are minimal.
How about the church actually pulling together and acting as one body? You are right, we need leaders to emerge in this. We need influential Christians stepping up and saying, we’re coming together, let us deal with it. Will we? William, that’s been the point of all of this. It isn’t about our government, or our nation, but about the church finally acting like the church. Jesus told the Pharisees that “mercy is better than sacrifice” when the disciples disregarded the law to fill their stomachs. God has always put the lives of people above the laws of man. Will we?
Jeff you might do well to read a book called “When Helping Hurts”. We must be sure our response does not do more harm than good.
I don’t think the author of that book had a situation like this in mind. this is a crisis and that is when help is needed.
Joseph, I have read that book and it has little to no correlation to the current events on the border.
You can’t compare long term effects of poverty relief efforts in the US to the current situation with minor children fleeing from rape, torture, and murder.
I went to a seminar with the authors of “When Helping Hurts.” They were the ones who made the distinction between “disaster” and “development,” but it one commonly known.
I think the name of the group is Baptist friends in Texas, they have been on the job for a while now.
One of the first rules in the medical field is “do no harm.” This past convention Dr. Moore of the ERLC was asked if his views on immigration reform and amnesty would cause more people to cross the border. He said no. I would like to ask him that same question today. Before we offer solutions, we must first establish that the solution does not do more harm than good. I do not have all the answers but I do think that we as Christians have a responsibility to do no harm. This push for amnesty the past year has contributed to the crisis. We must be sure that the response does not multiply the problem. I am inclined to agree with William Leonhart above in securing the border and sending these illegals home. We also must be willing to treat these people humanely and with Christ-like love. There are just so many factors involved here. America’s addiction to drugs have fueled this problem. Democrat politicians looking to sure up their votes for the rest of the forceable future have fueled this problem. Corporations looking for cheap labor have created this problem. Good-meaning but naive Christian leaders calling for amnesty have created this problem. We must be sure that the action we take as the church do not make it worse. We must be careful to not send a message that will encourage more parents to send their children this way. We must be careful that we do not give cover for sex-traders and drug dealers. I do not have all the answers but I know the one who does. We must pray and seek God’s wisdom.
You are not doing harm to children that you are plucking out of the desert and feeding, clothing, and giving them shelter. Again, we are not talking about the long-term solutions to a very complicated problem. We are talking about the short-term disaster that is happening right now at the border. There are ways to help these children while also sending them message in Central America that they are not to send any more. At any rate, all of that is out of our control. If the children show up in your city, I do not see how we cannot try to help them any way we can.
Am I on a Christian blog, or am I somewhere else?
Why is this even a debate? Seriously? And, yes. I am going to appeal to the gospel and our faith and say that if we aren’t rushing to help children in need, we have a problem.
“Am I on a Christian blog, or am I somewhere else?”
I’ve been asking myself the same question for the past couple days. Lately, SBC Voices is looking more like Rome than Nashville.
Alan has written the most life-filled post on SBC Voices I have read in a long time. Thank you Alan!
As for do we have the resources? The access? YES! If we go forth in Jesus name we will help and heal thousands. Not by might, nor money, but by faith in Jesus. I have had a thriving prison ministry in a Muslim Country for years. We feed, clothe, and PREACH the Gospel. With God’s power all is possible, we will not merely survive we will thrive.
Rome? Really? Interesting take. Not sure what Rome has to do with this.
Well said.
What message would have been sent if the load for caring for the children had immediately been take off the government, and church groups had stepped in with food, lodging, health care, and supervision? And with all of that, look at the opportunities we would have had to share the gospel, win some people to Christ, and of course, if they do get sent back, they go back transformed, with a message to share.
Do we believe in the sanctity of human life? If we do, then the care and concern for the people who’ve come across the border should be a priority over political commentary. Turning away children, teenagers and women who are essentially refugees from a terrible, insecure life nullifies our claim to this belief, and turns it into nothing more than political rhetoric.
As far as America undergoing a moral collapse, and the evangelical Christian community being treated as if it is irrelevant, that’s pretty much been the rhetoric, the thinking, and the case at least during the time that I have been growing up. If we are more concerned with the capital campaign to build another 5,000 seat sanctuary so that our church can seat more people it attracts from other churches, than we are about a mission to care for the refugee in our midst, that’s the root of the problem, and the reason why the culture at large sees us as irrelevant.
Amen Lee. America is the most selfish culture on earth today, and that reflects in our churches. We are irrelevant because we look just like the world. Act just like the world. And just like the world, look to government for solutions to problems that have not been addressed for what, 30-40 years. Anyone remember the millions we gave amnesty to in the 1980’s? Has the border been secured? Will it be? NO. I’ve been saying this for weeks, and I’ll continue to trumpet it. They are here. More are coming. They are probably staying. What will we, the church, do? Does any Christian truly believe that sending these children back to the hell from which they are fleeing is what is best for them? Best for our nations finances and comforts, maybe. But best for them? Who comes first, children or our pocketbooks and comfort? We need the spirit of the book of Lamentations for the sin, callousness and rebellion against God of our nation. Like Jeremiah, we as Christians need to be sick and broken over our sin. Only then will faith again prevail. “Give us your tired, your poor, your hungry…” Yeah, right
Joseph,
Are you sure you are not a Fox News contributor? Children are now illegals? All this time I thought they were children from other countries that needed help from us.
I say send the illegals, naïve Christian leaders, eight year old sex traffickers, six year old drug dealers, and those poor mommas that want the best for their children back to where they came from. We do not want any sick children in this country. I say withhold any medical treatment, and food so it will not cost the American taxpayer anything. Illegals? I hate illegals, because they are not people.
Jess,
“I hate illegals, because they are not people.”
Harsh, man.
Chris,
Maybe a little sarcasm can go a long way on this simple issue.
Your self righteousness is showing. You sure you are not a huff post contributor?
Securing the border is really a separate issue from this, and that’s becoming more clear as time passes and more information comes forward. This particular issue, and the children and women involved, are surrendering to American authorities upon crossing the border.
I grew up not too many miles from the border, in Arizona. The ranchers in that area always had a few illegals working for them from time to time, but things have changed since then, economically and as a result of the drug trade. For most of the stretch of border out there, the only thing between the two countries is a barbed wire fence. Near towns and cities, it’s chain link with barbed wire across the top, and in some places, it’s a metal barrier set in concrete. Until about 2001, there were enough border patrol agents and surveillance equipment to control the border. Then, their budget was cut, and about the same time, the flow of immigrants increased dramatically due to economic instability in Latin America, and the increased drug trade. For a brief time between 2008 and 2010, they did get more officers and equipment and a budget increase, but it got cut again by Boehner in 2010. The administration has asked for increases in every proposed reform bill it has submitted, but the current Congress won’t appropriate the funding. If we’re serious about securing the borders, someone has to foot the bill. Congress holds the purse strings. This poses a dilemma for the “less government is better” folks. Securing the border requires more government, not less.
Lee, I think the overwhelimg evidence is we are not serious about securing our borders. The politicians are more interested in political capitol and gain than defending the nation. Both parties. The primary purpose of the Federal Government is to defend the nation. Of all discussed in this thread, I think the one thing their is univeral agreement upon is we must secure the border. Will it happen? Not likely, so we’re left with the consequences. In this case, tens of thousands of children that will only swell in number. The church has never thrived in comfort and prosperity spiritually, who knows, maybe this will be exactly what is needed to separate the wheat from the chaff. The American church could use a good sifting
Joseph,
You will make no headway. If you disagree, it must be because of political persuasion. As a political conservative, if you cannot compartmentalize that part of your thinking when approaching this issue, you must be one of those gospel deniers. In fact, if you’re a political conservative, your politics must come from that non-theological corner of your brain in which you have absolutely no regard for God or the poor and needy. So, as many have already said to me on this blog, you just need to “put your politics aside.” Thinking about this issue long-term and how our immediate response to it will have lasting impact on how it continues to play out is just anti-gospel. Why do you hate Jesus?
William, III, again, your 8 points are actually pretty good overall – but many of them are dealing with long-term solutions which are beyond the scope of this post and also beyond the role of any of us to secure. I have been active in calling for long-term solutions and I am not in disagreement with you on much of what you say.
But … your other responses are what I have been responding to. You give your 8 points and in them you say that we should help people in need. But, then with the rest of your response to backtrack on that and say that it would be cultural suicide to do so,, or some other such response.
This post is about the immediate response and the belief that even those coming here for the wrong reasons should receive care and hear the gospel and experience love from Christians upon arrival while we have a chance. We are not the state. So, we do what we can to represent the Kingdom while also obeying the laws of the state.
The reason that we need immigration reform is because the practice of the State and the reality of the situation does not conform with the laws we have. That is a MAJOR problem. But, again, it is a long-term issue that goes beyond the needs of the people right in front of us.
No one said that you were a gospel denier. I have said that you are acting inconsistent with the gospel ON THIS ISSUE because you are not seeing the needs of the children and the opportunity that we have to minister to them before your immediate concern with what might happen if we do care for them. Well, we ARE caring for them as a nation and we are not sending them back and all of that is beyond our control. My call is for the church to express love and concern for the LIVES of the people coming as well. That does not mean amnesty or anything else as all of that is beyond us too. I am simply calling for us to express Christian charity.
You write your 8 points, but it seems that your primary focus is on making sure that no more illegal aliens come. That is fine. That’s a long-term approach. My primary focus in this situation is making sure that children are cared for with the love of Christ and THEN we can look at the long-term situation. We seem to be taking a different angle on this.
We disagree.
By the way, I am a political conservative. Most that I know of here are as well. But, being a conservative doesn’t mean that there is only one way to see this.
“We disagree.”
On the details, yes. On the overall mission, no. I’m simply urging caution. Can we offer them food, drink, immediate medical care, and the gospel? Yes. Will I condone, and do I think my church should condone, offering them asylum? Absolutely not!
Well, no one is calling for asylum. And, you are affirming what I have affirmed in my post. I guess that what is confusing about you is that, once we get past a lot of what you are saying about long-term issues, we agree on the actual essence of the post. We might also agree on a lot of long-term issues too. Maybe what I have reacted to with you is your initial response that seemed quite oppositional. If you are just trying to urge caution in regard to long-term issues, I have no disagreement there.
WFL, III, you were born 150 years too late – think of all the runaway slaves who failed to respect the laws of the land that needed to hear the message of repentance.
…too much Fox News I’m afraid.
In this case, many of these illegals are fleeing to slavery. Our economic system is set up so as to receive these people in as undocumented workers. They then go into work situations that are not regulated by Federal safety standards and to not provide medical insurance. They are gladly taken in because, “Americans won’t do the jobs they will do,” but that is not completely true. Americans do want, and need, jobs. They simply won’t be treated as slaves. The situation is far from the same. I am trying to prevent slavery, not enforce it.
That is a good point and I am glad that you made it. The argument by the Chamber of Commerce that we need to bring in undocumented workers because they will do the work that Americans won’t do is the same argument that Southern slaveholders made to keep Africans in slavery. Word. For. Word. Exactly the same. You are right, we have a cheaper form of slavery (or, a work-labor situation that mirrors it and accomplishes the same goals) both within the U.S. and abroad. But, again, that is a secondary issue.
The primary issue is what to do when children show up in your town. Do you help or do you tell them to leave? Even if the best answer is for them to be returned to Central America, how can we care for them while they are with us in a way that they know that they are loved by God?
Don’t buy it. They see economic lift here.
You ignored the repentance/law/slave matter. I figured that anyone who is so strident on this and who invoked Onesimus surely had thought this out and had a pat answer.
And, that is the other side. Even though work conditions here are bad for undocumented workers, they are still much better than the situation they are fleeing, which tells you how things are there. I have been to Guatemala and have seen how life is in the barrios there. Life is much better here, by far.
And what exactly do working condidtions have to do with a child? If the fields of America are slavery, are we now reverting to child labor as well? I’m pretty sure your OP was about these children, not the larger immigration issue
I am just talking about the overall issue in that comment. But, you are right. The OP was about the children and what we should do in the immediate situation. William, III, has made it about the larger issue and it is sometimes difficult to not engage with that too. But, thanks for the discipline.
When we are talking about the children, the working conditions should not matter – and it is the children coming – even if just 10,000 of the 60,0000 are unaccompanied minors, that is still a lot of children in need. A lot.
Alan, discipline was not intended. We are in agreement, though I am looking long term in my view, and that wasn’t exactly the intent of your OP either. This issue is weighing heavily on my heart. In our current call I have been exposed to things I really never have been before. We’re in an inner city neighborhood where children are in danger so it’s become a very personal thing for me. We have kids dealing with gangs and falling under their influence. Deal with drugs on a daily basis. We’ve had 4 murders within blocks of our church in the last year. And our situation is nothing compared to what these children coming here from Central America are dealing with. In our neighborhood we are becoming a safe haven for endangered children, and you still lose some. It hurts. We are these children’s chance not only for a better life, but more importantly, for Jesus. How can anything else be more important?
When our Lord told us that even a cup of cold water given in His name would be rewarded I don’t think He meant for us to stand around and contemplate the legal and political ramifications of our actions before we provide the water. The fact is that these are human beings in need, and you shouldn’t look at them the same way you look at a stray cat that if you feed the stray cat it won’t go away. The human need must take the priority in this instance, regardless of how one feel about the political issues of border security and immigration.
I have seen not one person say that we should mistreat these people. Everyone who has commented here has said that we should treat the people with dignity and kindness. But the fact of the matter is that we must think about the legal and political and sociological implications of all our actions. We think both short term and long term. We have had for two years or more, SBC leaders running around clamoring for amnesty for other illegal immigrants by saying that Jesus was an illegal immigrant while promising us as recently as the last convention that all this talk of amnesty would not increase the amount of illegal immigrants coming across the border. And now that this has increased the amount of illegal immigrants coming across the border, we are supposed to listen to the same voices telling us what to do. The fact of the matter is that this crisis has been exasperated by those calling for amnesty. I want to be charitable and help these people with food, clothing, and medical help but I want us also to be clear that we will not support amnesty.
Not one SBC leader has called for amnesty that I have seen. If so, please provide the link. If not, you are misrepresenting what they are saying.
I’m no SBC leader, but I personally believe the church needs to unify and take these children, only the children, in. How exactly that happens I don’t know. Probably just a pipe dream. It will take the church being something it is not now, nor has been in who knows how long. It would take a broken spirit to do whatever is best for a little child. I just cannot see how it is best for these children to return them to lands they are fleeing in terror for fear for their lives. The spirit of God’s law has always been to do what is best for people, especially a child. Mark 3 keeps ringing in my mind. The Pharisees set the trap for Jesus to see if he would heal, do a work on the Sabbath, so they could accuse Him. Only place in scripture it tells us Jesus was angry(though we see it other places). He was grieved over the hardness of heart. The needs of people, especially a child, are what God cares for, not the letter of immigration laws. This has become a no win situation in many ways. We are seeing many of those across the world right now. Who will we trust? God, or man? If our nation is to go down the tubes, which it is quickly doing, let it go down with the church being the church, not an enforcer of law or political pragmatist
Here is Dr. Russell Moore calling Jesus an Illegal Immigrant.
http://www.russellmoore.com/2011/06/17/immigration-and-the-gospel/
He has been very vocal along with several others in pushing for immigration reform bill that includes amnesty. He was asked at the last convention if his position on the reform bill would encourage more illegal immigration. His answer was no it would not.
Here is another article about the push for immigration reform and a legal pathway for illegal immigrants. http://www.religionnews.com/2014/04/29/one-time-evangelicals-head-hill-immigration-reform/
While they try to distinguish between amnesty and an legal pathway, in practice there is not much of a discernible difference. The message it sends is that if people can get into this country illegally, they will be able to stay. This encourages people to take a long and dangerous journey to get across the border where many of them will be taken advantage of in a myriad of ways.
Full self disclosure: My wife is a legal immigrant who spent much money and time to get here legally.
I would also like to see those on this blog who are calling for the church to help in this area to take the lead. Can any of you provide some of us who may be a bit skeptical with evidence from where you have already begun to take the lead on this issue? Can you show us where your church has went to the border to welcome these “children”?
Joseph,
A “legal pathway” is not the same as amnesty. They are markedly different things. Also, providing some kind of documentation for people to work, pay taxes, and come out of the shadows is not amnesty either. There is no citizenship involved in that. It only recognizes what is actually going on and seeks to improve the situation.
Here is what I have realized: The United States Government IS NOT going to identify and round up 12 million illegal aliens and send them home. It doesn’t matter how much you or I want that to happen. IT WILL NOT HAPPEN (caps for emphasis, not yelling). Since the reality is that the 12 million are going to stay here, then what should our response be? How should the church respond?
As for what we are doing, no, we have not been to the border. I live in Alabama. But, (as I said in the original post), word has come to us that children will likely be sent to our city. So, I have begun working to network with other churches and government officials to be a part of the solution and to help provide care for the children. If the church does not step in, others will. My initial overtures have been well received.
As for what is happening in Texas, I have read that Texas Baptists are doing quite a bit to meet the need down there. Others could speak to that better than I.
Joesph, we are also attempting to know if any are being shipped to SC as well. We have many military bases so it is likely we see some. The only government response so far has been to begin to disperse them across the land, and they are not officially announcing where they will be sent. We’re having to go through all sorts of channels. We’re all going to have opportunities. I’m working with our state convention and local association
The only ones we know about here have been sent to family members or other individuals. 350 total. Like in the other states, this just comes out, as the governors of the state are being told nothing.
Alan,
Amnesty is the legal pathway you, and many others are advocating. Once you allow those who have illegally entered the country a “legal pathway” without them returning to their country of origin and then entering legally into the country, you are in fact, giving them amnesty, no matter whether you call it a legal pathway or not. You are encouraging more illegal entry.
Nate, if that is the case, then we already have amnesty.
Here is the thing: No matter what our opinion on the matter is, the United States Government is NOT sending 12 million illegal aliens out of the country. It is not going to happen. It will never happen. NEITHER party is in favor of it. There is no political will for it. It will never happen.
If you want to give your life advocating for that solution, that is fine. I do not. I have other things to do. Therefore, my point is that you deal with the situation at hand. These folks aren’t going anywhere. So, what do we do?
But, again, that is a whole other post for another day on a different issue. But, no, I am not advocating for amnesty. Neither is Russell Moore or the ERLC, from what I understand.
Yes, Alan. We have in the past and we are currently in the process (no matter what we name it) handing out amnesty to those who have illegally entered the country. And, unless and until we get the border sealed and/or put extreme pressure on Mexico we will continue to give amnesty, because, as you said, no politician has the guts to deport people (let alone children).
By the way, I never said I was giving my life to anything. I was merely pointing out the fallacy of your argument of “legal pathway”.
“If you want to give your life advocating for that solution, that is fine. I do not. I have other things to do.”
I think this is precisely the point. We are asking, for those who have the time and / or resources, “What cause is most important here?” Some will say to go and provide care for these children. Others will say to work to reform the minds and hearts of the people so as to change the political landscape and fix this issue long-term. Personally, I don’t think either is wrong as long as the motive in both is to solve the problem and help those in need. What I do have a problem with is telling someone that, because your thing is not my thing, you’re wrong or working from a position that is not gospel-centric.
My point is that a gospel response might involve BOTH short- term and long-term solutions, but it can never sacrifice short-term aid over long-term issues. I think that we have to keep our eye on the needy child right in front of us. That is what I meant there.
Alan,
I don’t think there is one gospel response. The gospel transforms us, but it doesn’t uniform us. My response as an eye is going to be different than your response as a leg. It’s not my place to say that your response as a leg is invalid because you’re not responding the way “eye” respond. Some of us don’t have the time or resources to do what you propose, but we do have a vote and a voice. There is nothing wrong with a church or single Christian choosing to serve their church, their families, the legally recognized refugees to whom we’ve already been ministering in their backyards, their streets, prisons, and neighborhoods in already-existing evangelism ministries, etc. We need to be careful what how we bind other peoples’ consciences on these matters. Scam artists are rampant here in Fort Worth, stopping people on the street and asking them for money for gas and food and then driving off in their $40,000 cars. I’ve seen the same people pulling the same scam in multiple different parts of the city. Now, I can be wise and try to get the gospel to them by figuring a way to share it with them lovingly without being taken in by their scam. But it’s not my place to judge others who don’t make these scam artists, or the genuinely homeless and needy for that matter, THEIR ministry (all caps for emphasis, not yelling). Each person, and church, is called in his own way to minister the gospel. If someone says that my approach to a particular ministry needs more caution and wisdom, I don’t immediately assume that he doesn’t want me sharing the gospel with these people. Rather, I step back and see if I need to approach it with more caution and wisdom. We just need to be mindful how we come across in pointing out the necessity of the gospel in certain areas. What one sees as an area of gospel need, others may see as doing more harm than good.
Considering how this country was formed and developed, I don’t like the idea of turning it into the world’s largest gated community.
Well, I guess you don’t read history. There was a moratorium on immigration (limited to 2% of the ethnic background of existing citizens) from 1924 to 1965, mainly so that all the people who had immigrated at the turn of the 20th century could become Americans. Today we don’t even require people to give up their citizenship from the country they emigrated out of. No wonder why we all can’t get along.
Nate, I think you are right on your facts but wrong in your conclusion. This moratorium was not so those who had immigrated ca. 1900 could become Americans, but was a rather racist and ethnocentric move to preserve the (perceived) majority white Anglo-Saxon make-up of the country. It served as a tool to exclude large numbers of Africans, east Europeans, and Jews, and perhaps Hispanics as well. And I dare say Middle Easterners were not even on the radar then.
John
I think a greater openness to dual citizenship would accomplish 2 gospel purposes. First, it gives on going missionary like access to people groups that are difficult to reach by traditional missionary methods. Dual citizens take in the full American experience which for many is an increasing exposure to Christian faith and then travel “home” frequently with a positive Christian message. Second, most dual citizens fit into the “thought leader” “economic tiger” “intellectual” “entrepreneur” “middle class” genres. As such it is in there best economic interest for everyone to get along. Big picture issue = America’s immigration dilemma may be God’s way of extending the kingdom in our generation
Bill,
We’ve never had widespread, undocumented, unscreen immigration as the norm in this country. Yes. We are a nation of immigrants, but we are not a nation of lawlessness, and we never have been.
Actually, William, when my ancestors arrived from Germany in 1850, they just got on a boat in France and sailed here. When they got to New Orleans, they got off the boat, filled out some papers, and got to work. We wanted people to come then.
I get why it is different now, though, and agree that we cannot just let everyone come who wants to come. We’d have a billion people here in 5 years.
When some of mine came in the 1760s, it was because the British Empire offered 160 acres of land in South Carolina to “poor Protestant immigrants.” What they really wanted was to reduce over-populated areas in Great Britain as well as for cannon fodder to push the Native Americans out, since all that land was in hostile territory. And at that, it didn’t work well, since several in my family “immigrated” there from Virginia. My point is that there are unintended consequences of every deed. And there will be if we “just” ship these kids back across the border. I would dread the unintended consequences when I stand before the judgment seat of heaven for turning my back on “the least of these,” as well as for what the more immediate spiritual consequences might be for these folks (and consequently for the rest of us). And that does not even get into the human and political consequences might be.
Like yours Alan, my ancestors, both those who came earlier and those who came later, they just came and started looking for a few acres to farm.
John
I have been to China several times, visiting business both local and international. A common refrain over here is about the low quality, cheap stuff that the Chinese produce. And of course it is true. But that is not the fault of the Chinese, it is our fault. We get what we pay for. Those companies that demand and pay for higher quality from their Chinese divisions get it. Likewise, we get illegal immigrants because we demand cheap labor, and that is what we are willing to pay for. Our immigration crisis is not the fault of the people sneaking across the border, nor the politicians, but of the people who hire them. Our borders are large and we simply don’t have the funding to fence off the entire country. As long as there are greedy people, willing to flout the law and hire illegals, people will sneak in here to work. It shouldn’t surprise anyone that people want to come to the most free, most prosperous nation on earth. Well, just as the south prospered because of slavery (in part), many companies prosper by hiring illegals.
I don’t know the solution to the recent influx of illegal children, but treating them like lepers, (even if treated kindly as lepers) isn’t the right thing to do.
Alan,
As a homegrown Selma, AL boy (who now is stuck in Mississippi) I greatly appreciate you raising such important issues. I think issues such as this are highlighting the fact that the “Bible Belt” is really just there in name only because many people do not seem to be letting the gospel guide their thinking on this. When you raised your questions of “what if this is how God is working?” it reminded me of Habakkuk 1:5-6:
“Look among the nations, and see;
wonder and be astounded.
For I am doing a work in your days
that you would not believe if told.
For behold, I am raising up the Chaldeans”
If we are seriously praying for revival we had better be prepared for God to bring it. And we had better be prepared for God to bring it in His own timing and in His own fashion.
I would like to suggest that a VERY helpful resource in getting folks to think outside their tightly sealed Bible-belt box is the book “When Helping Hurts” by Steve Corbett and Brian Fikkert. There is apparently (another) new edition of it and you can check it out at this link:
http://smile.amazon.com/dp/0802409989?tag=chalscent-20&camp=0&creative=0&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=0802409989&adid=1VN663TF7EMEEZSF6EX3&sa-no-redirect=1
In Christ,
-Bob B.
I would like to take the opportunity to thank the administrators of this blog for allowing for dissenting voices in the comments. I know I’m not always the easiest guy to get along with, but I really appreciate that I have the opportunity to be heard when I come here. I would also like to thank Alan and Dave for being cordial and patient with me. I will say that there is a lot to affirm in the original post, though I may disagree with some of the details. We do need to feed the hungry and care for the sick and imprisoned. How we apply that to the current border crisis may look different but, nevertheless, it is the job of the church to figure out how we can be Christ’s hands and feet to the nations. God bless you guys.
I concur with this as well.
William and Joseph,
Thanks for that. I have been blogging for a long time and have been in a lot of contentious discussions, but hopefully with the awareness that we are all on the same side. I am all for disagreeing and presenting differing views. I have found that if we hang in there and keep talking, more often than not, we find common ground. Thanks for hanging in there and for continuing to engage so we can understand each other better. Unfortunately, sometimes it takes a while and this is not always the best medium for perfect understanding. But, I have enjoyed the challenge from you both. Thanks.
The current, concrete events of the border are somewhat novel but we can conceptualize at higher levels of abstractions and see a narrative in which we participate, thus it may serve to make space for a response that is humane and humanizing, assuming we wish to express gratitude for our new beginning and deliverance from forces constraining our being. Accepting that there are things beyond our control and believing such are not ultimately beyond the control of something even bigger and generative, we assert the possibility of order from chaos, meaning from senselessness, and hope from despair? We have evidence for these possibilities, thus surely we do not wish to forget the past because of its sometimes supposed inconvenience to the present and thus miss an opportunity to follow after the Spirit?
This is a complex problem that will be difficult to resolve given the plurality around both problem definition and solution alternatives, and from which we will muddle around for a time before a political, and hopefully moral, too, solution will enjoy sufficient support. That the people are well-cared for by us during this period is something that Christians can hope for and work toward.
William,
What do you have against offering those children who are in desperate need of help, asylum. Would you explain?
It’s economically unsustainable, and it encourages other children to make the trek unaccompanied. It’s irresponsible. I thought I already explained myself on this.
William, they are coming anyway. Their is nothing in how the government has dealt with immigration for 40 years that says we’re going to deport 60,000 children, or in the bigger picture, 12 million illegals. We agree, all of us I think, the border must be closed. But until it truly is, they will come, and they will come, and they will come. And if we by chance deported some of them, they will come again, and again, and again. Where they live is that awful. The church cannot secure the border, and we can’t deport people. So how do we deal with the ones that are here, the children that is, and are staying? Right now, barring a milatary presence on our border, it’s not getting fixed. And no leader we have now has the guts to do that. For the 60,000 that are detained, how many more are already here. This is a dire crisis, and the more of these kids the church can affect, the better off we’ll be. Without the church, many of these kids will just wind up in gangs here, and the cycle continues, and continues
I’ve already answered every question you pose in the above comment. Any new ones or can we just call it?
Wow. Great column. Thanks for putting together thoughts on revival and the child refugee border crisis. I couldn’t agree more. Our family recently returned from 19 years in Africa and this discussion in the USA has astounded us. If over 50,000 children had crossed an African border fleeing violence we’d call it a refugee crisis, and our churches and missions would immediately engage. I think the Bible calls us to consistent principles no matter what our location. Alan if you are ever in Chicago please feel free to give me a call. I’d love to buy you lunch and trade notes. God’s blessings on your writing, ministry, and hopes for America.
Wow, I am late to this discussion. I have not read all the comments so please forgive me if I missed something. Just curious if any of you talking here on either side are doing anything oher than talking? I mean, are you asking the government to send some of these kids into your homes? How many are actually sharing the gospel with the gang members? Is your church going to TX/AZ on a mission trip to help in the assimilation and care and gospel sharing? Or even helping to re-connect the kids to their parents? Just curious. Easy to talk about what should or should not be done. James 2:14-17
K.R., we are actively seeking info on any of the children that may be sent to SC, as they are currently being dispersed across the country. The feds aren’t releasing the info, but it’s come out in some places. I know Alan who wrote the article is as well. We engage gang members here as we’re an inner city church. Have several of our preteen/youth that are flirting with it, or even joined(one in jail now) so it’s a huge issue for us. As far as going to TX/AZ, I wish we could. Right now not realistic, but if we locate some here(we have many military bases so we’ll get some) we’ll do everything we can to reach out to them as the government allows. Right now the government is not allowing any of the children to go in to an adoptive situation as I understand. Probably won’t until aome sort of ajudication occurs and it is settled as to whether a child can stay or possibly be dported(don’t see that happening with too many). Prayerfully, their will be an opportunity and Christians will step up and fill the need. Me and my wife plan to look in to it
Jeff P.
Fantastic! I work in missions and so often people talk and do little else. I commend you. Great job. I wish there were more churches active in getting outside the walls of the building.
Great disparities in wealth and income will (has and does) attenuate the middle-class, increase the lower class, and decrease mobility among all classes. Thus, if we wish a democracy that seeks the good of all peoples, preserving individuality but not at the expense of the common good, our present trajectory of wealth and income disparity, if left unchecked, will likely propel the country to economic and political systems of earlier centuries of this country. Problem is our social reality is a bit more complex than the 18th and 19th century America, thus economic conditions consistent with those times will create great tensions and suffering in our communities.
The present trajectory is not sustainable to an America that we (most of us, some of us) would prefer, but we seemingly are head-strong to stay the course. If we wish to engage in unsustainable behaviors, lets then choose those that demonstrate care for the least among us. If we go down, we go down with our heads held high.
Lots of good thoughts being shared. One cautionary note in our approach to the children. I picked up on some generalizations of giving the children “a cold cup of water …. and the gospel.” That’s a good thing. It’s not that simple.
Just as children need ongoing, sustaining nourishment physically, their spiritual needs are much bigger than a decision for Jesus. They need ongoing protection physically and ongoing growth spiritually. Even a clear profession of faith and a cursory understanding of repentance is not going to propel them to a mindset of obeying the law and returning to their home.
These children need to be recognized as refugees. And as such, the church needs to be that refuge for them. She has been given everything that is needed to provide a long-term hope and future along with short (or maybe long) term provision and protection.
Let us guard against a simplified ‘cold water and gospel’ approach. Cold water is needed. The gospel is needed. But it could end up being a sanctified “be warm and be filled”. Nothing is greater than the gospel — but let us fulfill the great commission and make disciples. That takes time.
Regarding children crossing the border:
Who do we contact about helping the children find homes? We are foster parents in Georgia and would like to help these children in any way we can. I just heard that 1000 children just came to the Atlanta area. Who can we call? Thank you!
We would like to know that as well. Are the children considered orphans? Yes, I realize that they have birth parents, and yes, many of them were sent here to live with a relative already in the US. What about the ones who have no relatives here? Did their parents send them here for temporary hiatus until things are better on the home front, or were they sent here permanently? I know, a lot of questions we may not be able to answer.
We are adoptive parents and would consider adding to our family if the children were truly orphans.