Living
Theology in the Metropolitan Chicago Synod
Volume 12, Number 2
Summer 2007
Hispanic-Latino Theology and Ministry
On
the Way by Benjamin Dueholm
Anxious
Exegesis and Immigration: Speaking on a
Contentious Issue
An experienced observer of public religion in America could,
without reading anything on the topic, imagine the outlines of the unedifying theological
debate over our country’s immigration policies.
Recent attempts at rewriting immigration laws have addressed the
difficult policy areas of border security, a guest worker program, establishing
the status of those already here illegally (and in many cases their citizen
children), and family unification. Yet
the explicitly Christian voices on the matter have generally treated these
issues not as ambivalent and thorny but as part of a sweeping and simple application
of Biblical ethics as encapsulated in a few verses.
The broad coalition known once as the Christian Right and
more recently re-branded as “values voters” has predictably continued its
practice of dragooning Scripture and theology into the service of a
pre-existing conservative political and cultural agenda. Paul’s exhortation to good order and faithful
citizenship in Romans 13 is a popular text with respect to the question of
illegal immigration. The Christian
Coalition even proposes Deuteronomy 27:17 (remember that one?) as an authoritative
Scriptural statement on the matter of national boundaries. Such anxious exegesis often points to a
serious moral and theological ambiguity.
An online poll conducted by the Family Research Council found large
majorities in favor of building a wall on the Mexican border, arresting and
deporting illegal immigrants, and printing election ballots exclusively in
English. Only 10% of respondents
described the requirements of Christian discipleship with respect to immigrants
as “Illegal immigrants enter the United States as strangers searching for a
better life for themselves and their families and they should be welcomed, not
punished or sent home.” The rest say,
“Illegal immigrants should be treated humanely, but they are breaking properly
enacted laws and they should be detected, arrested, and returned to their
country of origin.” Whether the absence
of the exculpatory introductory clause would have lowered that 90% response is
an interesting question. In any case, it
is noteworthy that so many self-professed values voters consider the aggressive
detection, detention, and deportation of so many human beings—without regard to
the integrity and well-being of their families or communities—to be compatible
with treating these same human beings “humanely.”
This is not to say that the Right has cornered the market in
theological simplification. An
open-borders attitude justified with broad reference to the Good Samaritan and
loving one’s neighbor is not at all uncommon among church liberals. Typically, as in a recent resolution proposed
for the United Church of Christ, this call to love and help the neighbor
presents itself as a univocal ethical demand, the fulfillment of which is
relatively uncomplicated. When I have
heard preachers insist that we welcome the stranger and not build up walls
either in Mexico or in the West Bank, I always suspect that he or she goes home
and locks the door.
In the midst of this roiling, hostile, and simplistic debate
(mirrored, of course, in the arguments made by secular groups), the ELCA has
wisely decided to update its teaching on immigration with “an additional
message on immigration.” The current
message, adopted in 1998 after restrictionist legislation in 1996 (including
measures that denied federal benefits and protections to legal residents), hews
generally to an immigration-expansionist line anchored in Matthew 25 and
Leviticus 19. Lutherans’ history as an
immigrant and refugee population is noted, as is our record of welcoming asylum
seekers and others resettled for reasons of war or political persecution. In distinction with more radical voices,
however, the ELCA message does assert the right of a nation to control its
boundaries and protect its population from an influx of contraband and crime
(read the message at http://www.elca.org/socialstatements/immigration/).
I recently discussed the new “additional message” with Laura
Koepke, a writer and researcher on the project (Ms. Koepke, a friend of many
years, formerly worked for the Refugee Services Division of Lutheran Social
Service of Minnesota and in what follows she speaks for herself only). The new address, she told me, will expand on
the policy dimension as well as re-articulate the theological principles of the
original message. Following the
terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, some ELCA synods began requesting a
new message on immigration to reflect concerns about borders, immigration, and
national security. The process of
producing an additional message began before the introduction of last year’s version
of the Kennedy-McCain immigration bill and will be proposed for adoption by the
Church Council in April of next year.
The additional message will likely continue to address a
decades-long Lutheran emphasis on family reunification over skills-based visa
provision, Ms. Koepke told me, as well as an emphasis on generous asylum and
refugee laws. “Provisions of the
USA-PATRIOT Act have labeled refugees as material supporters of terrorism” even
if they are escaping legitimate persecution in Columbia or Burma, she
says. On the other hand, we may see a
more pronounced (and traditionally Lutheran) emphasis on the rule of law. “The rule of law is important,” Ms. Koepke
says, “so it’s important to have laws that work. The current laws don’t reflect the situation.” Rather than enforcing the present laws at the
cost of immense national effort and great human suffering, the best way to
promote respect for national laws and sovereignty may be to reform those laws
and admit
many of those here illegally as legal residents with a chance
to become citizens. The Two Kingdoms
theology of Luther may be relevant, she says, in balancing the need to preserve
national boundaries and laws with a Biblical call to welcome the stranger even
as a citizen and neighbor (Leviticus 19:34).
I
would take this logic farther. The
Gospel gives the Church no authority to exclude any human being from access to
protection and well-being. This is
especially true when many are being excluded or attacked for reasons of
national fear or ethnic or linguistic hostility, and truer still when these
attacks happen under the auspices of Scriptural piety. Yet the state must administer a limited and
imperfect law for the order and welfare of a limited and imperfect world--a
world in which the entirely unregulated flow of humans from one place to
another would have serious and painful consequences for all involved.
With
the demise of this year’s attempt at immigration reform, it seems that this
complex of issues will confront the nation until the additional message is
taken up by the Church Council and perhaps for a year or more after. Hopefully this additional message will
contribute something to our impoverished national debate in a way that does
justice to the breadth of Scriptural witness and the depth of our communion’s
experience both as stranger and as citizen.
Benjamin Dueholm
Intern,
Bethel-Imani Lutheran Church
Englewood,
Chicago, Illinois