Comments on: Aliens among us: Part I http://www.servingbread.net/2007/06/17/aliens-among-us-part-i Thoughts, Musings, Reflections, and Ramblings of a campus minister, father, husband, and a Jesus-follower Thu, 04 Dec 2008 03:19:11 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 By: Tyler Watson http://www.servingbread.net/2007/06/17/aliens-among-us-part-i#comment-7758 Tyler Watson Tue, 19 Jun 2007 21:04:26 +0000 http://www.servingbread.net/2007/06/17/aliens-among-us-part-i/#comment-7758 I really like your points, Eddy. They remind me of something Cardinal Roger Mahony said in protest of an immigration bill going through the House last year (I blogged about it <a href="http://spacebetween.blogsome.com/2006/03/02/church-state-relationships-on-immigration/" rel="nofollow">here</a>). What I hear in your argument is that as Christians we are called to make the values of the kingdom our starting point and measure rather than assuming the laws and values of the state onto our obligations as churches. I really like your points, Eddy. They remind me of something Cardinal Roger Mahony said in protest of an immigration bill going through the House last year (I blogged about it here). What I hear in your argument is that as Christians we are called to make the values of the kingdom our starting point and measure rather than assuming the laws and values of the state onto our obligations as churches.

]]> By: Eddy E http://www.servingbread.net/2007/06/17/aliens-among-us-part-i#comment-7756 Eddy E Tue, 19 Jun 2007 18:41:11 +0000 http://www.servingbread.net/2007/06/17/aliens-among-us-part-i/#comment-7756 Thanks for your thoughts Tyler. You bring up a lot of important and undeveloped points (on which I hope to elaborate in future posts, which is why I just titled this one, Part 1). One point of clarification on your first point: Yes, most Christians would say that God's kingdom is available to all, and this is where my general statements with no elaboration dis-served what I'm trying to communicate--realistically, we don't function that the Kingdom is open to all. Our structures and theology can sometimes serve as a limiting factor. And another point of clarification, I was not trying to equate the kingdom of god to the nation-state. In other words, when I'm saying "open to all" I don't mean that as a contrast to the nation-state that may close its doors to aliens. What i simply meant is that whenever we are operating as gate-keepers to the Kingdom, let's keep in mind that it's we don't discriminate based on legal status or skin color. Thanks for your thoughts Tyler. You bring up a lot of important and undeveloped points (on which I hope to elaborate in future posts, which is why I just titled this one, Part 1).

One point of clarification on your first point: Yes, most Christians would say that God’s kingdom is available to all, and this is where my general statements with no elaboration dis-served what I’m trying to communicate–realistically, we don’t function that the Kingdom is open to all. Our structures and theology can sometimes serve as a limiting factor.

And another point of clarification, I was not trying to equate the kingdom of god to the nation-state. In other words, when I’m saying “open to all” I don’t mean that as a contrast to the nation-state that may close its doors to aliens. What i simply meant is that whenever we are operating as gate-keepers to the Kingdom, let’s keep in mind that it’s we don’t discriminate based on legal status or skin color.

]]> By: Tyler Watson http://www.servingbread.net/2007/06/17/aliens-among-us-part-i#comment-7754 Tyler Watson Tue, 19 Jun 2007 17:25:48 +0000 http://www.servingbread.net/2007/06/17/aliens-among-us-part-i/#comment-7754 I want to thank you for your thoughts on this matter, Eddy. Romans 13 is a challenging passage for Americans who (rightly, in my opinion) celebrate the fact that we rebelled and revolted from another nation. If we interpret Romans 13 narrowly, on what basis could the US have done that? I fear that Romans 13 is generally used when we want to give some theological credence to laws with which we agree. But if Romans 13 is interpreted as it usually is in conservative circles -- as a defense of the right of the state to make and enforce its own laws -- then we also need to ask why is it acceptable for some to shake off dictators and oppression in favor of another government? Where are the biblical and theological data (that is a plural word) for protest and change? It's all throughout the Bible, but if in forming an understanding of how Christians are to interact with the state we <em>only</em> look to Romans 13 and interpret it narrowly, we will miss out on very important traditions of reform. I appreciate that you're trying to get Christians to think about immigration in a Christian manner, not letting the current policy debates be the only resources that shape our views. I too want to look at a Christian idea of the alien -- a topic that receives much attention in the Bible and Church texts. I think I agree with much of what you said here, but if you'll allow me to play the devil's advocate, I'd like to ask you some questions -- I think these questions bring out some of the issues at play in shaping a Christian response. 1. You write that "we need to recognize that the kingdom of God is available to all." I don't think any thoughtful Christian would disagree that God's kingdom is available to all -- especially since most of us are Gentiles these days. But what does God's kingdom look like in your understanding? Are not the kingdom of God and modern nation states different entities? And just because God's kingdom is available to all, does that mean that nations must therefore open themselves to all? 2. You write, "If churches are mistreating or contributing to the oppression of immigrants or immigrant communities, they need to stop. But more complicated is the call for churches to advocate on behalf and against institutional oppression or mistreatment of the aliens." What does that mistreatment and oppression look like to you? For some, policing and deportation of people who come into a nation illegally, are practices of justice justice, means of protecting the rights of citizens and immigrants who came into a nation through legal means. How would you respond to this? 3. Is it justified to differentiate immigrants in the US into legal and illegal? Are there such things as illegal or legal immigration? 4. You do a wonderful job showing us that we shouldn't just look at Romans 13 and you bring up texts like Exodus 22.21 and others found in the Torah. What of texts like Ezra 10.11-17 in which the people of Israel are told to separate themselves from their foreign wives? Does that text show us anything about immigration and treatment of the alien? If so, what? If not, why not? I want to thank you for your thoughts on this matter, Eddy. Romans 13 is a challenging passage for Americans who (rightly, in my opinion) celebrate the fact that we rebelled and revolted from another nation. If we interpret Romans 13 narrowly, on what basis could the US have done that? I fear that Romans 13 is generally used when we want to give some theological credence to laws with which we agree. But if Romans 13 is interpreted as it usually is in conservative circles — as a defense of the right of the state to make and enforce its own laws — then we also need to ask why is it acceptable for some to shake off dictators and oppression in favor of another government? Where are the biblical and theological data (that is a plural word) for protest and change? It’s all throughout the Bible, but if in forming an understanding of how Christians are to interact with the state we only look to Romans 13 and interpret it narrowly, we will miss out on very important traditions of reform.

I appreciate that you’re trying to get Christians to think about immigration in a Christian manner, not letting the current policy debates be the only resources that shape our views. I too want to look at a Christian idea of the alien — a topic that receives much attention in the Bible and Church texts. I think I agree with much of what you said here, but if you’ll allow me to play the devil’s advocate, I’d like to ask you some questions — I think these questions bring out some of the issues at play in shaping a Christian response.

1. You write that “we need to recognize that the kingdom of God is available to all.” I don’t think any thoughtful Christian would disagree that God’s kingdom is available to all — especially since most of us are Gentiles these days. But what does God’s kingdom look like in your understanding? Are not the kingdom of God and modern nation states different entities? And just because God’s kingdom is available to all, does that mean that nations must therefore open themselves to all?

2. You write, “If churches are mistreating or contributing to the oppression of immigrants or immigrant communities, they need to stop. But more complicated is the call for churches to advocate on behalf and against institutional oppression or mistreatment of the aliens.” What does that mistreatment and oppression look like to you? For some, policing and deportation of people who come into a nation illegally, are practices of justice justice, means of protecting the rights of citizens and immigrants who came into a nation through legal means. How would you respond to this?

3. Is it justified to differentiate immigrants in the US into legal and illegal? Are there such things as illegal or legal immigration?

4. You do a wonderful job showing us that we shouldn’t just look at Romans 13 and you bring up texts like Exodus 22.21 and others found in the Torah. What of texts like Ezra 10.11-17 in which the people of Israel are told to separate themselves from their foreign wives? Does that text show us anything about immigration and treatment of the alien? If so, what? If not, why not?

]]>