Illegal Immigration: Let’s THINK about this

In light of the immigration turmoil roiling Minnesota, I wanted to summarize some basic concepts that I believe to be helpful and biblical , and if you get through that I will offer my personal conclusions and interpretation of what is happening in Minneapolis at the end. The tragic events of recent days cannot be rightly understood, processed, interpreted, or judged without a framework of truth. I know thinking isn’t what we’re good at, but we really do need to think before we act, speak, or post. Memes do not make for good doctrine. Social media does not make for good communication. So please take a minute to think through this with me. There is no way in a post as short as this to fully explore all the biblical issues, but we can at least begin orienting ourselves to basic principles so that when we get to the thorny issues, we are operating out of a biblical worldview.

im·mi·gra·tion /ˌiməˈɡrāSHən/          the action of coming to live permanently in a foreign country.

Immigration is a difficult topic because there are policy issues and then there are the people those policies affect. There are legal status questions and then there are the personal realities impacted by those policy decisions.  

#1 Civil government is the proper authority over immigration

Immigration is a national issue and the acceptance or rejection of immigrants is at the discretion of the civil government. Under normal circumstances*, church government does not preside over the borders of a nation. Likewise, under normal circumstances*, household government does not wield authority over the borders of a nation. And finally, under normal circumstances*, individuals do not possess authority over the borders of a nation. Civil government is the proper authority for maintaining the flow of people over national borders.

* When I say “under normal circumstances”, I am thinking of exceptions being something  commensurate with the hiding of Jews by the Ten Boom family

A certain amount of common sense alone would tell us that someone needs to be in charge of the border. Biblically, borders are a feature of God’s sovereignty (Acts 17:26). Every modern nation maintains their borders, and throughout history kings maintained the borders of their power. If we discard the concept of borders, then Greenland, here we come. If we discard the concept of borders, then Ukraine must fall because there is no such thing as Ukraine. Borders are axiomatic realities for the existence of nations.

So because there are such things as borders, who is responsible for guarding and maintaining them? Who is responsible for taxing goods that cross borders? Who is responsible for ensuring that those who cross borders are doing so properly and with good intentions?  While the Christian church can and should inform the decisions made by civil government, the church has neither a commission from God nor a practical means of presiding over immigration. The household government is even more limited in its capacity to oversee immigration. Civil government is the only reasonable authority over immigration. We would rightly consider the civil government derelict in its duties if it failed to exercise due diligence in overseeing the flow of individuals across borders.

In the American system of government, the federal government – as opposed to State governments or even more local governments – are responsible for immigration. This makes sense because it would be impossible for the national interests of the USA to be maintained if individual States had differing immigration policies. States that geographically border other nations may have additional measures of protection to prevent illegal entry in cooperation with the federal government, and all States have an obligation to cooperate with the Federal government.  But it is unquestionable that the lawful authority for immigration is the federal government.

For a nation as large and as economically powerful as the United States, immigration is a large and complicated responsibility that entails such things as 1) creating and utilizing processes to screen immigrants for safety and security concerns, 2) establishing quotas or limits that maximize benefits to its own national interests, 3) determining and engaging in humanitarian exceptions to normal immigration policies, 4) removing immigrants who violate the terms of their residency, and 5) prohibiting entry by those who seek to circumvent the legal process of immigration.

#2 – Christians are called upon to be obedient to the civil magistrate

In Romans 13, Christians are called upon to submit to the civil magistrate (the king or the emperor or the governor) because he is appointed by God as a deacon of righteousness. Of course, the significance of Romans 13 is that the civil magistrate is God’s servant, meaning that he has a higher authority above him. While the default position of believers is to submit to the civil magistrate, this is not without exception. Christians are first and foremost commanded to obey God rather than men.

I am glad that Russell Moore has suddenly realized that Romans 13 is not a universal bludgeon for demanding that Christians wears masks. He’s a bit late to the party, but glad he showed up and hope he brought some wings.  Christians throughout history have been pretty good at consternating the civil magistrate. But when a Christian refuses to obey the civil magistrate, he must do so for one of two reasons. The first occasion is when the actions or commands of the civil magistrate are in rebellion to God. “No sir, I’m not going to bow down to your idol” would be a classic example from the book of Daniel. Or in the book of Acts, “No sir, we won’t shut up about Jesus and we intend to keep telling everyone about Him”. If obedience to the civil government would be disobedience to God, then believers must rightfully refuse to obey the civil magistrate.

The second occasion is when the civil magistrate is attempting to operate outside of his God-appointed sphere of authority. For example, Christian parents can and should refuse to send their children to indoctrination classes intended to normalize perverse sexual behavior at the local government school, because the household is the proper authority for education. This is a great time to assert “household government” against civil government. Or a church might defy the civil magistrate who has decided that people are more than welcome to congregate at Walmart but not at church. This is because the church has authority over the gathering and the sacraments. This would be a great time to assert “church government” against civil government. In these cases, the limits of the authority of the civil government are in question.

In both cases, resistance to the civil government cannot be undertaken in a sinful manner. The historical record is that Christians often suffered great persecution in order to resist the Leviathan of the civil government. This resulted in loss of life and property more than anything else.

Because the United States constitution is a series of checks and balances against abuses by the civil government, there are many recourses to resist the civil magistrate inherent in our political system. Which is nice, because it avoids a lot of bloodshed.  When churches defied local governments and continued to gather during Covid lockdowns, they risked their property but were vindicated by legal challenges that showed the state was discriminating against them. This is one option for resistance that is absolutely available to believers.

#3 Churches, families, and individuals have a different kinds of responsibility to immigrants than does the civil government

I would offer an example before delving into this one. Several years ago, a coworker of mine was arrested for a terrible crime and imprisoned at the jail just minutes away from my house. As a pastor, I was able to visit him in jail. We talked and prayed and read Scripture together, and it appeared to me that he was genuinely repentant and remorseful. I was able to offer him hope in the forgiveness of Christ. Then I left and they threw him in the big house for 10 years. And all of that is good. There is no conflict there. As a personal friend and as a pastor, I had a responsibility to urge him to confess, repent, and receive forgiveness. But if the civil government had not punished him for his crime, they would have been failing in their responsibility. Civil government’s responsibility toward any individual is one of enforcing the laws of the land so that the wicked are punished and the righteous are free to live in peace from oppression.

Most of life, thankfully, happens in the social realm of households and churches and individuals. For the irreligious reading this, think “community”. And that’s wonderful, because we can and should solve a lot of issues without involving the civil magistrate. It is a sign of a blessed society when the civil magistrates is less involved in the affairs of life (Proverbs 28:2) But once an issue enters the realm of the civil magistrate, the civil magistrate “does not bear the sword in vain” (Romans 13:4). When the civil magistrate withholds punishment, he is not being merciful; he is being derelict in his duty. If the civil magistrate had withheld punishment for my friend because my friend had personally repented, the civil magistrate would have robbed the victims of justice and set a dangerous precedent (Ecclesiastes 8:11).

In Scripture, believers are admonished to be hospitable, even to the stranger (foreigner) dwelling among us. As churches and as households and as individuals, we ought to take that admonition seriously. But we should not confuse that admonition with the civil magistrate’s responsibility towards immigration. His responsibility is not to determine how to feed, clothe, or befriend an immigrant. His responsibility is to ensure that the immigrant is following the immigration policies created and maintained by the federal government. His failure to do so makes him culpable before God and negatively impacts society as a whole.

Because Christians have not always understood or articulated the different responsibilities given to civil government, Christian virtues have been weaponized in such a way that the end result is catastrophe instead of redemption. Soft virtues, like mercy and compassion,  in the hand of the civil government carry the weight of force, and therefore always become oppressive, not liberating. The civil magistrate’s job is rarely to be a vessel of mercy; mercy is the job of the church. The civil magistrate’s job is to make and enforce good laws, and to protect law abiding citizens. Until there is a recovery of this understanding of the nature of civil authority, Christians will be easily manipulated by emotional arguments.

Some Broad Conclusions

As I stated at the beginning, I am just summarizing and scratching the surface of these points. But at least there is a working framework for thinking through the immigration turmoil in the United States. Based on that, below are my own personal thoughts and interpretations of the current state of immigration in the United States.

1. I am 100% pro-immigration. I grew up overseas and am thankful for the nation that hosted my childhood. America is a desirable nation to come to, and we should rejoice that we attract a wide variety of people who want a better life. We are a better society for the contribution of the immigrants who make up our history and our contemporary life, and you could throw a rock in just about any historical direction and find evidence of this very point.
2. We also attract a wide variety of nefarious actors who have no intention of becoming lawful citizens and participating in the social life of our nation. This comprehends not only those who are distinctly criminal, but also those who have no intention of contributing to a Christian democratic republic, such as radical Marxists or certain types of Muslims.
3. Therefore, our borders must be secured against illegal entry and an immigration policy adopted that allows a reasonable number of immigrants – a number that allows for cultural assimilation and does not destabilize communities – to be welcomed into our country. This process should be clear and reasonable, and there should be limited exceptions for foreign individuals who are experiencing particular persecution (think Maria Corina Machado of Venezuela) or particular friends of the United States (such as the Afghan nationals who partnered with the US during our occupation of that nation and were then left to die at the hands of the Taliban when we so tragically left them unprotected).
4. The Biden administration is culpable for the heinous crimes committed by persons who entered the country illegally during its refusal to fulfill its lawful obligation to maintain national borders. Every child who has been sex trafficked, every young woman who has been raped and killed, and every individual who has been murdered is not only the victim of a particular crime, but of the civil magistrate’s failure to reasonably protect its citizens. This culpability not only extends to the Biden administration, but to every civil magistrate who has released violent criminals back into society and to every “sanctuary city” that is implicitly harboring evil and wicked men
5. The Biden administration’s failure and the continued refusal of the progressive left to adopt and enforce reasonable immigration policies are as nefarious as they are incompetent. I believe it to be a political strategy with the cost to society being evaluated and deemed acceptable. It is deeply grieving to me that local and state governments controlled by leftist refuse to turn over violent criminals to federal authorities. I can understand refusing cooperation in many ways, but I can’t for the life of me understand why any police department or mayor or governor would want to protect a child molester or a rapist or a gang member.
6. I am very sympathetic to those who entered the country illegally but are genuinely trying to live a good life. Had I found myself in their shoes, I would have done anything in my power to make a better life for my family. Most immigrants that I encounter are Hispanics working difficult and unpleasant agricultural, landscaping, masonry, or construction jobs. Some have been here for decades and are just good people. This is the most emotionally complex issue many are struggling with today.
7. Nevertheless, I don’t believe that illegal immigration is “victimless”. The fact that these folks are here illegally not only makes them vulnerable to sudden expulsion by lawful government, but also to the abuse and machinations of gangs and organized crime. There is a societal cost as school systems fail to keep up and charitable enterprises are overwhelmed. The reality is that the failure to be here legally increases the odds that an immigrant (or their family members) will become victims of extortion or sex trafficking. Illegal immigration puts more people at risk and increases the corrupting influence of organized criminal enterprises.  
8. If Christians, or any other group, believe that the lawful immigration policies are ineffective, outdated, overly complicated, or defective in any way, then they should work through lawful means to get them changed. You will get no argument from me that the civil government is often bloated, ridiculous, incompetent, corrupt, outdated, etc… I have personal friends, who would make great citizens, refused entry or permanent visas or residency and it drives me insane. These are people we want here, for crying out loud. Could there be a coalition that actually convinces the political powers to create an effective immigration policy? Who knows…I still believe in miracles.
9. Conservatives – those who believe in a limited government – find themselves on the side of the federal government on the issue of immigration. Which is a strange place for a conservative to find himself these days. This isn’t hypocrisy or a blind allegiance to MAGA causes. Conservatives believe that the civil government has a real and significant role to play in society, and one legitimate use of its power is the flow of people over national borders.
10. As much as I like and have compassion for hard working immigrants who crossed the borders illegally, I think all illegal immigrants should be required to leave the country and if they refuse to do so, should be forcibly deported. In my dream world, such people would have immediate recourse to legal re-entry via work visas or even paths to citizenship. But I don’t believe the current situation is salvageable due to the massive number of illegal immigrants let into the country under the Biden administration.  

Regarding Minneapolis

I don’t know that I have any helpful thoughts. Watching it from afar is frustrating. I do know that after the George Floyd riots, we should all refuse to let our passions get away from us by anything coming out of Minneapolis, which appears to be a terribly governed, fraud filled city held hostage by corrupt politicians and narcissistic activists.  What isn’t helpful is political blustering. AI generated content isn’t helpful. Knee jerk reactions and jumping to conclusions and inciting political unrest isn’t helpful. Following ICE agents around and blocking them with vehicles is a truly terrible idea. Recruiting a washed up CNN anchor to help you agitate at a church service is horrible. The MSM is terrible. And the politicians are terrible.

It is also terrible to see masked federal agents shooting citizens. I mean, really terrible. While I believe the federal agents should have every opportunity to defend themselves and come home safely to their families, the two shootings should be formally investigated in the way that every police shooting is formally investigated, and the officers involved in those shootings should be taken out of the field until the investigation is complete. I hope that de-escalation is in order and that the federal government re-evaluates its tactics, while I hope the local/State government considers finding some reasonable way of cooperating with the federal government as it attempts to fulfill its lawful responsibility.