I recently saw a comment from someone to the effect that the big challenge with the current migrant/small boat crisis is a lack of Biblical teaching on the subject for the church. I agree that there needs to be more careful Biblical discussion and teaching but we also need to be aware of some pitfalls too. Here are some things to be alert to.
First of all, we need to be alert to the distinction between Israel as God’s chosen people and modern states. The parallel is not Israel to the UK or US government but, Israel to the church. It’s important therefore to think for example about the responsibilities the church has both in its care for “strangers” who are not part of God’s people and to protect its boundaries before we think about states, borders and asylum seekers. This does not mean that there aren’t principles to learn and apply but we need to do that carefully.
This links to the second pit fall. We need to be careful about anachronisms. I think this is the risk seen in James Mildred’s summary of James K Hoffmier’s argument here. Hoffmier distinguished between the resident alien or sojourner and the foreigner and argues that the former is equivalent to the legal immigrant so that they are beneficiaries of rights and privileges. The illegal immigrant is equated with the foreigner and therefore not entitled to anything.
There are a few problems here. First, that ancient Israel would not have thought in our categories and so would not have had a system of distinguishing legal from illegal and would not have policed borders in that kind of way. It is perhaps better to think in terms of the general concept of foreigners and the sojourner as a foreigner who has not become part of God’s people but chooses to or is forced to settle in the land for a period of time. One problem with anachronistic approaches is that we start reading things into the text (eisegesis) instead of drawing meaning out of the text
Thirdly, we still have time get out modern categories right. Mildred talks about the illegal immigrant and the legal immigrant. However, too often asylum seekers and mis categorised as illegal immigrants, though international law is clear that they are not.
One concern I have here is that there is an attempt to distinguish similar to the Victorian categories of deserving and undeserving poor. The result is that we choose who we consider worthy of help and welcome.
Finally, we need to think carefully about how we handle principles. Is there a principle of welcome and care for the vulnerable stranger? Yes there is. Does that say something about asylum seekers. I’m sure it does too. Similarly, Romans 13 gives responsibilities to the government in terms of justice, law and order and protection. That could apply to border control as well. However neither principle tells governments the details of immigration policy either way.
Christians on both sides of the debate need to show grace and wisdom as they seek wise and godly answers to the crisis.
Faithroots 