Welcome

Matthew 25 contains a passage of Scripture that can remind us of the opportunities that we have to
minister to others, recognizing that we are serving the Lord faithfully in doing so:
34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, 'Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world:
35 for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in;
36 I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.'
37 Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, 'Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink?
38 When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You?
39 Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?'
40 And the King will answer and say to them, 'Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.'

Our King, the Lord Jesus, who has loved us greatly, encourages us to love others well.  As we love Him wholeheartedly - the great Commandment - then that will ideally affect the way we regard other people.  Out of our devotion to Christ can arise a charitable heart, a heart that desires to show the love of Jesus to those with whom we interact and to seek ways where we can spread His love to a greater degree.

+++++

The Bible admonishes us in Leviticus 19 to view those who are different than we with charity and hospitality:
33 'And if a stranger dwells with you in your land, you shall not mistreat him.
34 The stranger who dwells among you shall be to you as one born among you, and you shall love him as yourself; for you were strangers in the land of Egypt: I am the Lord your God.

I think there are a number of areas about which Christians can agree in the immigration debate.  Border security is certainly a concern, and there are numerous opportunities for churches and ministries to become involved in reaching out to and ministering to those immigrants and refugees who have come to this country.  I think that's tied up in the concept of "welcoming the stranger."

What is of concern, as I've expressed, is how some Christian groups have adopted a view of immigration that puts them in alignment with forces who are advocating for open borders.  And, there are some who, in the name of Christianity or religion, are attempting to place a Biblical stamp on shaping governmental policies that will provide them with financial resources.

Case in point:  The Christian Post reports on the latest high-profile maneuver by a group called the Evangelical Immigration Table.  This, at its inception, seemed to be a fairly large group that was signed on to by a number of Christian leaders.  It now consists of a handful of organizations who have made it their aim to promote more liberalized immigration policies.  It was launched a few years ago by a group called the National Immigration Forum. As Rebecca Hagelin put it succinctly in an op-ed at Townhall.com:

The Soros folks try to discredit anyone who shines the light on their sordid activities. But the money trail is evident for all who care to follow it. Although tracing Soros money is something of a shell game, it isn’t that difficult. Simply Google, download and read the IRS 990 forms of his $20 Billion “Open Society Foundation,” the National Immigration Forum (Soros is the largest donor, followed by Ford and Rockefeller), and the Tides Foundation, for a start.

Now, Table leaders will say that they don't get Soros money.  But, they have not distanced themselves from the National Immigration Forum, either, some even allowing their names to be used in a pro-immigration Fourth of July full-page ad.

So, what's the latest on the Table? The leaders have sent "a letter to three top federal agency officials expressing 'deep concern about the impact on international religious freedom of recent changes in the U.S. refugee resettlement program.'" This letter, sent to "Homeland Security Secretary Kirstjen Nielsen, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo and Ambassador at-Large for International Religious Freedom Sam Brownback..."

...calls on the administration to set the U.S. refugee resettlement cap for fiscal year 2019 at 75,000 refugees, which would be about 50,000 refugees more than a planned limit reportedly being considered by the president for next year.

The article goes on to say:

"The number of religious minorities who have been offered the opportunity to escape oppression and rebuild their lives in the freedom of the United States is down dramatically as a result," the letter reads. "These declines have been most stark for persecuted Christians and other religious minorities in the Middle East, many of whom have endured a genocide at the [hands of the] Islamic State."

It also says, "In short, cuts to our refugee admission program affect all persecuted religious minorities, but these cuts significantly impact our persecuted brothers and sisters in Christ..."

Whoa, wait a minute.  One of the Table members, less than two years ago, was saying that Christians should not be prioritized.  An article on The Guardian website stated this:

“We oppose any religions test that would place the suffering of one people over another,” said Scott Arbeiter, president of World Relief, the humanitarian arm of the National Association of Evangelicals.

Other Christian leaders also came out strongly against the notion that the US should prioritize Christian refugees, which Trump said in an interview he wanted to do and which the executive order he signed on Friday couched in terms of preferring religious minorities from the seven Muslim-majority countries concerned.

Go back to 2015, and you'll find an article at The Stream by Faith McDonnell, who pointed out that "According to official data from the State Department’s Refugee Processing Center for Fiscal Year 2015, resettled Syrian refugees were 97% Muslim."  She wrote:

On September 30, an article in the Huffington Post exclaimed that even “Christian groups that work with refugees are strongly opposed to a proposal that would in effect put Iraqi and Syrian Christians ahead of Muslims for resettlement in the U.S., even if they are also victims of persecution.” The article does not explain that many of the “Christian groups” mentioned have been recruited by the VOLAGs that profit enormously from resettling refugees in areas they and the Federal government choose.

These organizations, which include Church World Service, Ethiopian Community Development Council, Episcopal Migration Ministries, Hebrew Immigrant Aid Society, International Rescue Committee, US Committee for Refugees and Immigrants, Lutheran Immigration and Refugee Services, United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, and World Relief, acquire an average of some 70% of their revenue from taxpayer-funded federal grants and contracts. In some estimations, they receive more than $4,000 per refugee resettled.

And, now World Relief, a member of the Evangelical Immigration Table, is claiming that increasing the number of refugees coming into the country will help our "persecuted brothers and sisters in Christ..."  That is certainly a shift.  Again, remember that these VOLAG's received 70% of their money from taxpayers and are paid PER REFUGEE.  I certainly don't want to question motives here, but the optics are definitely not good.  That's a 2015 figure - the website, Refugee Resettlement Watch, now says that the evangelical group, World Relief, was 73% funded by taxpayers.

So, when you see Evangelical Immigration Table, you have to remember two things: 1) there is a direct tie to the National Immigration Forum and 2) one of its members, benefits financially from refugee resettlement.

And, now this group is lobbying the Federal government to use taxpayer dollars to bring more refugees into the country.  But, wait, stop, aren't we to welcome the stranger?!!  Absolutely - and it would be great to see these immigration-related organizations step up to fund these efforts, rather than attempt to influence the government to use taxpayer dollars to carry out the agenda.

An organization called Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration, partnering with Catholics for American Renewal in a letter in support of an immigration bill that would strengthen border security and enforcement, a bill defeated in the U.S. House earlier this year, stated:

We are challenging “faith” groups with economic self-interest in porous borders, as some are highly funded to facilitate high levels of migration and refugee resettlement (USASpending.Gov). The enormous funding of the Obama-era “welcome” and refugee industry has broken up many families.

It also said:

Scripture does not teach open borders, but wise welcome. We’re to embrace the "ger,” the one who comes as a convert and blessing, like Ruth and Rahab. We’re to show hospitality to well meaning invited guests. And we’re to exclude and deport people who do not come as a blessing but as a danger. Nehemiah & Ezra helped their nation rebuild its faith, culture and nation. That required walls, and the whole counsel of Scripture. Wisdom.

Signatories included Eric Metaxas, Everett Piper, Sam Rohrer, Carol Swain, John Zmirak, and the aforementioned Rebecca Hagelin.

It is important that we allow the Scriptures to inform our viewpoints on policy issues.  There is a subtle change that is taking place in some evangelical messaging these days.  Such issues as immigration are now becoming "image of God" issues; i.e., we should want to champion a more generous immigration policy because immigrants and refugees are made in the "image of God."  I just came across a new initiative recently that is offering faith advocacy for paid family leave - that's a concept that sounds noble, and there are companies that provide it for families who have just had a child; but if it involves businesses being forced by government to provide guaranteed income, then that is problematic.  A report on the website uses "image of God" in its language.  There is now an attempt to redefine "pro-life" to mean "whole life," a concept decried by prominent pro-life leader Kristan Hawkins of Students for Life:

“Whole life” or “consistent life” proponents will argue that merging abortion with other issues like the death penalty, poverty, or nuclear proliferation in one movement is necessary to convince people that we’re really serious about being pro-life. They then demand ideological purity on a whole range of issues that aren’t necessarily connected, an approach that reduces the potential number of people who will join our movement. It is hard enough to get people who agree that abortion should be illegal, no matter the circumstance. By bringing in other issues, we limit our ability to build a winning coalition. We should want as many people as possible to feel they can be part of our movement. We ought to expand the tribe, not limit it.

She declares: "Diluting the anti-abortion cause with vague terms like 'whole life' threatens our movement’s goal of abolishing abortion."  I agree, and it's concerning to see barbs thrown at pro-lifers, who are accused - falsely - of caring more about the pre-born that those already born.  

So, we have to be discerning about ideas that infiltrate the Church that serve other agendas.  There has been a trend pointed out that a host of social concerns have been labeled as "gospel" issues.  But, we recognize that Romans 1 defines the gospel as the power of God unto salvation for those who believe."  While we are to be involved in speaking out on policy issues Biblically, we can see that the hope for our nation and all humanity lies in changed hearts, the fruit of the message of the gospel.