Historic Significance of GOP Takeover of House of Representatives

Christians and Immigration Reform

Recently, I've been critical of the presiding bishop of the denomination to which I belong, the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), for his rather specific lobbying of President Obama on the subject of immigration reform. (You can see the substance of my criticism here and here.)

None of this is to say that Christians shouldn't think--and think hard--about issues like immigration reform from the perspective of their faith.

Four years ago, I did a series of blog posts on How Christians Might Think About Immigration Reform. In it, I didn't present a point of view or an opinion, but a series of windows through which Christians might want to think and pray about this big issue. Since it has come back to the fore as an issue, here are the links to all four installments:

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4

I hope that you find these helpful.

The Preacher, the Church, and Justice

The Christian preacher has a responsibility to speak for justice.

Pastor John Ortberg underscores this in a challenging article in the latest issue of Leadership Journal, Preaching Like the Prophets. There, he looks to the prophets of Old Testament times to show how important the quest for justice is for followers of the God Who revealed Himself to Israel and ultimately, in Jesus of Nazareth.

Writes Ortberg:

Events that horrified the prophets go on every day in our world, but we just get used to it--like you get used to wearing your watch. After awhile--we don't notice any more.

The prophets noticed. The prophets never got desensitized to sin. Injustice is sin. Justice is central to shalom.* We omit justice from our preaching at peril of our calling, and of our congregation's health and ability to see the reality around them.

Ortberg goes on to say that there are certain perils associated with preaching about justice, particularly in these times. "Our society has become so politicized," he points out, "that people often hear words like justice or life or the poor or compassion as code words for a partisan political allegiance in one direction or another." Also, he notes that preaching about justice can devolve into "self-righteous moralism" on the part of the preacher. But for all the perils it may entail, the preacher is still called to talk about justice as an outgrowth of Christian discipleship.

Most importantly maybe, Ortberg in this very good article, says that in preaching about justice, church leaders "will have to explain that the values embedded in the Bible do not necessarily have a straight-line translation into legislation." He writes:

For instance, all followers of Jesus are obligated to be concerned for the poor. But that does not mean that they should all be committed to passing a higher minimum wage law. Very bright economists disagree about whether such legislation actually results in helping the poor. As preachers, we do not further the cause of the authority of Scripture when we pretend to be experts over fields we have not mastered.

Amen!

Justice is an important element of the Christian's relationship with Jesus Christ. This is something we acknowledge in our Lutheran tradition, among other times, on the occasion of Confirmation, or Affirmation of Baptism, when adolescents or adult converts who have been baptized and trained in the faith publicly affirm their intention of living as faithful followers of Jesus Christ in their daily lives. Toward the end of the rite for Affirmation of Baptism, each individual is addressed and challenged to do just that:

You have made public profession of your faith. Do you intend to continue in the covenant God made with you in Holy Baptism: to live among God's faithful people, to hear His Word and share in His supper, to proclaim the good news of God in Christ through word and deed, to serve all people, following the example of our Lord Jesus, and to strive for justice and peace in all the earth?

The confirmand is then asked to respond with the words, "I do, and I ask God to help and guide me."

The message of the prophets was, in a nutshell, "Turn from sin, including injustice, and turn to God." None of them laid out specific political programs, recommended particular outlays of money to address specific issues, or commended particular laws. They trusted that if they shared God's Word, including the call and the command to seek justice, God would help the people see what they needed to do.

Today, preachers (and denominational groups) are called to preach justice and trust God to do the rest.

*Shalom is a Hebrew term. It means more than peace. It has the idea of our enjoyment of peace with God and all the good things--including justice and love--that flow from it in our relationships with others. Such peace begins in a relationship with Jesus Christ in which Jesus is our Lord, God, and Savior. As Paul writes in Romans 5:1, "...since we are justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ..."

[UPDATE: Just today, Bishop Mark Hanson of the ELCA, released the text of a letter in which he got deep into the weeds of immigration reform, not my idea of what the bishop is best at or called to do.]

Hanson Statement Highlights Problem with Churches of the Left...and the Right

One of the biggest problems in the Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA), of which I am a part, is its leadership's insistence on speaking out on a variety of political issues, pretending, it seems to me, that their positions are unambiguously "Christian," when in fact, Scripture gives no such authority.

It matters little to me that the agenda pushed by our denominational leadership is "liberal," which it mostly is. I was complaining about the Religious Right's equation of Christian faith with conservatism a long time ago, and for the same reasons I am so critical of my own denomination's leadership today. Both the ELCA's leaders with their liberalism and those of denominations pursuing conservative political agendas are, I believe, equally heedless of the Gospel, equally prone to an "idolatry of ideology," and equally likely to confuse people about what it means to be a follower of Christ while alienating the very people with whom we're called and commanded to share our "good news.

I returned from a few vacation days in New York to find an email and press release announcing that the ELCA's presiding bishop, Mark Hanson, is pressing the U.S. Congress for immigration reform.

Immigration reform along the lines proposed by Bishop Hanson may very well be a fine idea. And there can be no doubt that we Christians are commanded to treat the strangers in our midst with hospitality and love.

But Bishop Hanson can hardly argue that he has a warrant for saying that two of the "principles" he endorses ("helping new neighbors come out of the shadows...and seeking a path to permanence for new neighbors") have Biblical or confessional authority. They are merely his political preferences, nothing more and nothing less, even if he feels a churchwide assembly vote gave him the right to issue such a statement in the Name of Christ and the Church.

Except in cases where the witness of Scripture is unambiguous in its message for civil authority and a pluralistic society, the Church needs to stay out of politics. Our mission is to share the Good News--the Gospel--of Jesus, not win legislative votes, elections, or coercive power.

Here are some other places where I've written on this subject:
No Politics from the Pulpit...or From Preachers

A Pledge I Wish Every Christian Leader Would Make
Jesus is Not a Republican. Jesus is Also Not a Democrat.
Who is the 'Values Voter'?
"Do religious ideas undermine democratic discourse?"
Dr. Dobson, Stop Playing This Dangerous Game!
Politics Endorsed by a Church? I Don't Think So!
Why Separation of Church and State is Best for the Church and Its Cause
Iraq, the Church, and 'Christian' Political Commentary

Luther on "Opposing Evil"

This comes from Faith Alone, a daily devotional composed of Martin Luther's essays, sermons, and table talks:

But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If someone strikes you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also. And if someone wants to sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. (Matthew 5:39-40)

Getting involved in secular matters isn't a sin for Christians. Believers are simply carrying out the responsibilities that all citizens have--whether Christian or non-Christian. Yet believers have to consciously avoid sin and do what Christ expects of them. In contrast, the people of the world don't do what Christ requires.

That's why when Christians fight in a war, file a lawsuit, or impose a punishment, they are functioning in their role as soldier, lawyer, or judge. But within these roles, Christians will want to keep their consciences clear and their motives pure. They don't want to hurt anyone. So they live simultaneously as Christians and as secular people. They live as Christians in all situations, enduring hardships in this world. They live as secular people obeying all national laws, community regulations, and domestic rules.

In summary, Christians don't live for visible things in this life. These things fall under the authority of secular government, which Christ doesn't intend to abolish. Outwardly and physically, Christ doesn't want us to evade governmental authority or expect us to abandon our civic duties. Instead he wants us to submit to and make use of the organizational and regulatory powers of the government which keep society intact. But inwardly and spiritually, we live under Christ's authority. His kingdom isn't concerned with governmental authority and doesn't interfere with it but is willing to accept it. So as Christians and as individuals, we shouldn't resist an evil person. On the other hand, as citizens with responsibilities in society, we should oppose evil to the full extent of our authority.

[UPDATE: In the comments, Bob asked what might be meant by "secular." I tried to answer that. Here's what I wrote (fixed a bit, since I initially wrote it on the fly):

Thank you for your kind comments. I am feeling better and in fact, in a short while, intend to do a little dusting here in the house while my wife handles lawn-mowing duties.

As Luther uses the term, secular, in this citation, I believe that he's referring to offices and functions other than Christian "offices," whether those filled by clergy or laity.

What underlays these remarks is Luther's understanding that God operates in two kingdoms here on earth: the kingdom of the right and the kingdom of the left. The kingdom of the right is composed of those persons who voluntarily and by faith, live under the reign of Christ. They remain sinners as well as saints, but they seek by daily repentance and renewal to live out the new life given to them by Jesus Christ. Their intention to live in accordance with God's will is something they offer up freely out of gratitude for Christ and is not coerced.

However, because we still live in a fallen world, God has also established the kingdom of the left. This is composed of the governments, laws, and regulations, whose coercion is necessary to keep unrepentant humanity in check. Christians voluntarily live under such secular authority out of love for their neighbor. [Luther also says that if there were no kingdom of the left, we Christians would live in a world like lambs among ravenous wolves.]

Accordingly, Luther argues that Christians may, with clear consciences, provide services to governments. He would argue, I'm sure, as the Augsburg Confession states emphatically, that the Church and those holding Church offices, in their capacities as officers of the Church should refrain from taking secular authority, lest voluntary acquiescence to Christ's authority become coercion; lest too, those pastors, priests, or bishops speak and act on their own authority rather than that springing from the Church's true power: the Word and the Sacraments.

There is good reason to be critical of some of what Luther reasons from Scripture. There were too many Lutheran clergy--Dietrich Bonhoeffer is a notable and blessed exception--who felt that acceptance of secular authority meant they needed to go along with Nazism. There were also Lutheran apologists for slavery in the antebellum US.

But this may not be an inherent flaw in Luther's two kingdoms thinking. There must be exceptions when Christians break with secular authority.

A Mennonite theologian, John Howard Yoder, provides a useful gauge by which we can judge whether Christians are free to break with secular authorities. Yoder puts two passages of Romans in tension. First is Romans 13: 1:

"Let every person be subject to the governing authorities; for there is no authority except from God, and those authorities that exist have been instituted by God."

The other is Romans 12:2:

"Do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your minds, so that you may discern what is the will of God—what is good and acceptable and perfect."

I may have my personal opinions about the actions of secular authorities. As a Christian individual, I am free to vote as a please, write to members of government expressing my views, etc.

But I dare not invoke the name of Christ, nor may my Church, speak out on political issues unless a secular authority asks me or other Christians to live in ways that conform to the fallenness of the world rather than the will of Christ.

Keep in mind that Paul wrote these words during the Roman Empire. He did not, in his office as an apostle of the Gospel, speak out on political issues. The Church of today should show similar reticence, I think. We have bigger fish to fry--making disciples.

If the Church will be about the business of making disciples, those living under the kingdom of the right--Christ's kingdom--will change the world without political power plays, social statements, wars, or coercion. The power of the Holy Spirit to woo people to faith and true righteousness is infinitely greater than the secular world's capacity to coerce what Luther called a "civil righteousness" from resentful citizens. The Church is crazy to go for secular power or to cozy up to politicians when it already has more power at its disposal--through the Word and the Sacraments and prayer--than any government or empire in the history of the world.

That's my windy response, Bob. I hope that it helps.]