A Balanced View of UK Immigration

https://www.evangelical-times.org/as-nigel-farage-surges-in-the-polls-is-immigration-a-christian-issue/      

Generally speaking I have not been overly impressed with the Evangelical Times. The reasons for this are varied, but I found this article both balanced and even refreshing as the author (Mike Judge) demonstrated a willingness to break with mainstream political thought and to challenge (and likely offend) many who are committed one way or the other. As is often the case, those one step removed from the American political scene exhibit a little more in the way of sobriety and wisdom.

I received it in my inbox - unfortunately, others who want to read it will have to 'register' - basically give them your email to which you can later 'unsubscribe' if you wish.

I receive their newsletters just for my own reference. I read a lot of ET articles but there are quite a few I don't bother with and there are also some that are behind a paywall that I don't bother with either. I only have the free subscription.

Judge is correct, immigration is an issue Christians need to discuss. Now as to what he means by this and how it might apply in terms of the public square and lobbying and the like - well, I don't rightly now. I would have to say I probably wouldn't agree with everywhere he might go to on that point.

That said, it's a live and polarizing issue in Europe, the UK, and the United States and Christians are interacting with political messaging and media and so Church leaders might want to say something. Thankfully Judge seems to be rejecting (to some extent) all the mainstream voices as well as that of the surging demagogue Nigel Farage.

He rightly appeals to the imago dei and the fact that government is legitimate. Now obviously this latter point spawns a lot of confusion and consternation. As I have repeatedly stated, I expect the governments of the world to defend what is theirs and their interests. This shouldn't surprise us and yet we're not aligned with them or necessarily against them either. The New Testament disavows libertarianism and nationalism. The state is not nor can ever be Christian.

Despite the state's general providential legitimacy, we have other concerns that will sometimes lead us to disregard laws on a humanitarian basis. This might be something basic - like helping a desperate person with food and water. Activists who go out looking to aid illegal immigrants, that's a bit different. I'm not saying they're always wrong but it's definitely pushing the ethical envelope. They're looking for trouble and exercising disobedience in a way different from those who are trying to live quiet obedient Kingdom-driven lives. When the latter New Testament framework is combined with bourgeois values it takes on a very different character - one that must also be eschewed. It becomes the ethic of the insulated suburbs or akin to the space station in the movie Elysium.

All that said, given that many immigrants are fleeing economic and geopolitical conditions that are sometimes created by Western countries, their militaries, and financial interests - a case can be made for helping these people. Those that do so need to understand that they may have to pay a price.

This is further complicated by the fact that so many Christians are also invested in these larger systems and/or work for them and as such throw their moral standing into doubt. In other words there's something ridiculous about someone who 'cares' about immigrants while they have an investment portfolio - they profit from the system that drives the Atlanticist Empire is integral to it.

I think it's a mistake to speak of governments having a 'right and duty' to enforce immigration. It's not a matter of obligation or prerogative - in other words it's not something we as Christians need to worry about judging per se. Lost man will build his Babels and we can also say let the dead bury their dead. I'm not going to get caught up in a discussion of rights or duties. It's simply what they do and regardless of the legalities or jurisprudence, it will undoubtedly be done in not only an imperfect but unjust manner. States don't enforce laws because it's the right thing to do - because they seek to glorify God. They do things because it's in their interest to do so.

In reality I think figures like Gladstone or say George W. Bush who sought to implement 'Christian' policy, in reality did nothing of the kind and only did a disservice to the Church in spawning greater confusion. The real fault though lies with Church leaders who did not correct them, hold them to account, and worse, celebrated their misguided policies and misdeeds.

I think Judge's comments on loving one's neighbour are excellent. I would only say that we shouldn't even bother with discussions of control, numbers, and enforcement. Otherwise his comments are spot on.

I also appreciated his sojourner comments. He's right, you cannot make a one-to-one comparison with Old Covenant Israel. But certainly there's some applicable equity. Now I would say that doesn't apply to modern Britain or America but to those within the covenant - making the application both more narrow and more poignant. Those who take Old Testament general equity and apply it mutatis mutandis to modern states are misusing Scripture and effectively decovenantalizing or secularizing God's Law - even as they think they are sacralizing the societies in question.

It's like if the United States started doing courthouse baptisms (by a judge) in connection to citizenship or voting or something. It's a gross (and sacrilegious) misapplication and one furthered by the false division of God's law into moral, civil, and ceremonial categories. That's a distinction that does not exist in the Scriptures. It's all covenantal and thus all redemptive (even the punitive parts that bear witness and purify the covenant community). The confessional tradition is just flat wrong on this point. While the 'divines' had a better grasp of redemptive-history than many do today, they were completely wrong on this point.

The appeal to Acts 17 in order to justify borders is bogus. Providence determined the borders and it can just as easily determine their fluidity and fall. Nations are far from static. As Christians we are citizens of Zion. Whatever nation we happen to belong to is a question of jurisdiction and legality, not loyalty or allegiance. Contrary to most Evangelicals of our day we need to understand that our allegiance is not divided or subject to duality. We are citizens of the Kingdom who happen to live in other nations - to which we were called out of. We obey the laws and pay our taxes, but we're not invested in these Babel (and often bestial) projects.

Again, the Babel nations will build their walls and fences and station their armies on borders. That's not our concern.

As far as 'speed and scale' - again, this is not our concern. History informs us that cultures change and are dynamic. The British were upset by Irish immigration and yet today despite differences, the focus of the British Right is not on the Irish (who are mostly nominal Catholics at best) but on the peoples of the former empire.

Likewise, Catholics were brought into the US in order to man factories and industrial endeavours and there were grave concerns at the time leading to public school legislation, the renewal of the KKK, and even (to some extent) Prohibition.

Today, opinions are divided in the United States. Many are hostile to the influx of Hispanic immigrants while others seem them as Catholic allies in the culture war directed against Islam. Others additionally resent Indians (both Hindus and Sikhs) and a growing number resent the Chinese - which ironically repeats an earlier chapter of American history. A study of these dynamics should at least generate some reflection.

I must disagree with Judge on one point - Ruth is not an example of integration. She's a figure in redemptive-history. I can understand why nations want immigrants to integrate. For some that's not good enough - they want assimilation. Her attachment to Naomi is not a model for immigrants assimilating.

Additionally the pattern usually suggests the first generation will not integrate very well. The second generate integrates, while the third generation assimilates. I've watched these dynamics right in front of my eyes in various ethnic restaurants and at festivals over the years.

This can go wrong as we've seen when immigrant enclaves or ghettos develop along with dissident subcultures as seen in parts of the UK and France among other places. I can see why the state would be concerned but unfortunately the measures they take tend to also end up restricting Christians. The Christians who fall into this political track of anti-immigration are motivated not by New Testament ethics but sacralism and nationalism. And so (ironically) their errors are actually more serious (from a Christian perspective) than immigration actually is to whatever nation or jurisdiction they happen to live in.

Christian leaders need to teach their people to reject politics, political parties, and slogans. I would extend this to voting, juries, and the like. This results in marginalisation and second-class status - something Biblical but antithetical to the sacralist tradition and the foundational cause of modern Evangelicalism. Immigration is almost always connected to imperial power and how it's wielded at its frontiers and beyond. Unless you address that point (which is obviously systemic), nothing much will change apart from some very brutal policies. Several hundred years of Roman history also testifies to this.

The Unity point is also appreciated. These issues should not be allowed to divide congregations and those who aggressively push political agendas need to be called out as schismatic. All too often they make their political platforms and allegiances the boundaries of orthodoxy - at which point they themselves have become unorthodox.

I have long argued that Europe is facing future upheaval - most likely violence and possibly civil war over the issue of Islamic immigration. The political struggle is already well underway and unfortunately I see many Christians getting on board with these movements. Tragically many of these political trends are reviving the rhetoric, methods, and ideology of fascism. The fact that this is making inroads into the Church is beyond tragic and signals not just a pending crisis but one already well advanced.

Immigration is certainly a gospel opportunity but that opportunity will be squandered and destroyed if it overlaps with or is overtaken by Right-wing politics.

Judge is on the right track and again, I found the article to be refreshing and as such I'm sharing it. May God grant us wisdom and fruitful reflection.