I e-mailed him back, asking who the church is most apt to help. Certainly they are most apt to help fellow Christians. Where does that leave the immigrant who has just received citizenship but has few resources? Or the Muslim, who lives in a poor community? What about the workers who have been hurt by financial scandals when the CEOs made millions of dollars? What about the drastic needs that come from communities hit by a hurricane and left with billions of dollars in damage? Or from the tsunami that has washed away hundreds of thousands of people and hundreds of communities, leaving needs far beyond what one church, or two or three, or even one denomination, can handle?
I asked, “How much money do most churches have? Do they have enough to rebuild homes, pay for job training, provide food and medicine and doctor appointments for the family in need? Is there any church, even the most wealthy, that can afford what is needed as a result of a catastrophe or difficult, unbearable situations?”
One of the Christians said we should not be forced to give money to causes that we don’t believe in. He is also a pacifist, so he said he didn’t want to fund war. I agree. I don’t either. But people who adhere to this reasoning might think, “I shouldn’t have my tax dollars go to funding education, because I don’t have any children and I’m finished with my own schooling.” Others might think, “I shouldn’t have to fund Medicare because I won’t have to worry about my retirement for a few more years, and Mom and Dad are dead.” Perhaps they believe, “I shouldn’t have to fund the roads in Iowa, because I haven’t driven on them for many years.” When did we become so selfish we forgot about the common good? If we followed this policy, it would divide the nation into prideful interest groups with only their own selfish desires at heart.
Some Christians don’t see the necessity of helping the poor because they believe that they must focus on their individual relationship with Christ. After hearing this idea a number of times, I asked one of my Republican Christian friends, who is a Baptist, if she agreed with this. She said she did not. She answered, “There are plenty of lost, lonely, and deserted people within our borders to keep both church and state busy, so I fear that the statement that churches should fix the problem is a veiled form of greed. I don’t see that the churches are responding, and therefore our disenfranchised people will be out in the cold, literally, which is truly heartless.”
She continued, “Of course, churches should be stepping up and out for our own faith, but that does not mean we should eliminate government assistance. I don’t see how anyone in their right mind can think that churches can replace Medicaid, or take care of all our health needs, or education and job improvement programs. There is a huge difference between soup kitchens and shelters and the long-term needs of people with mental and physical disabilities.” This friend had been a Republican. She changed her to the Democratic Party in 2008 partly because of the Republican stance on these issues (and partly because of the first edition of this book).
Another friend reflected, “I don’t see any Republican governors refusing assistance when their state is in trouble.” New Orleans and New Jersey received millions in assistance after hurricanes. California received help after their forest fires. Ebola and Zika outbreaks were handled quickly with government assistance to alert the public and to contain the diseases. An exception to this occurred when the governor of Michigan refused to ask for government assistance for the health hazards caused by poisonous water in Flint, Michigan. The US government had to suggest and even beg to come in and assist the residents of Flint, many of whom were black and poor, and all of whom were victims of Governor Rick Snyder’s merciless policies. “Nor are there any Republican members of Congress who have turned down their Social Security or refused their excellent health insurance. What they do for themselves they should consider doing for others.”
After hearing from the many Republicans who do not agree with my friend, I wondered if I had misread my Bible. Perhaps I was wrong. Perhaps the Bible was only talking to individuals. I soon found more than 500 passages addressing nations. I reread the book of Jeremiah, the prophet appointed by God to talk to the nations. God said, “I brought you to a country of plenty to enjoy its produce and good things; but when you entered you defiled my country and made my heritage loathsome.”8 There are many loathsome acts which the nation did: “The very skirts of your robe are stained with the blood of the poor.”9 “There are wicked men among my people … they set traps and they catch human beings. Like a cage full of birds so are their houses full of loot; they have grown rich and powerful because of it, they are fat, they are sleek, … they have no respect for rights, for orphans’ rights, and yet they succeeded! They have not upheld the cause of the needy. Shall I fail to punish this, Yahweh demands, or on such a nation to exact vengeance.”10 God tells the nation they must “treat one another fairly … not exploit the stranger, the orphan and the widow … not shed innocent blood.”11 He scolds the nation and its leaders for having “eyes and heart for nothing but your own interests, for shedding innocent blood and perpetrating violence and oppression.”12 The Democrats have a far better record at addressing these commands.
And What About the Stranger?
One of the most challenging issues confronting our country revolves around immigration. There are about 11–12 million undocumented workers in our country. About 50% of these come from Mexico. There are also hundreds of thousands of foreign travelers, sojourners, students from other countries, and refugees who come to our country for short or long periods of time, who are not “like us” but who have different skin color, cultures, dress, languages, and ways of approaching their daily lives. In theological language, these people are sometimes called “The Other” and are objectified, dismissed, rejected, and told to go back to their own country and their own people.
With regard to the stranger, some people act on the principle “Nothing human is foreign to me,” while others seem to be saying, “Nothing foreign is human to me.”
The Bible recognizes the difficulties immigrants confront and asks us to respond with compassion. There are more than one hundred verses in the Bible about how we need to treat the stranger. The Bible put the needs of the stranger along with the needs of the orphans and widows, and told the Israelites that special care needed to be given. They were told, “You must not oppress foreigners,”13 you must “Love the stranger as yourself,” and you must not “deny justice to the foreigner.”14
Why are we asked to be so kind to strangers when they seem on the surface to be a threat to the prevailing culture? Historically, immigrants to any country were often brought in to fill the need for cheap labor and to take the difficult jobs that other people didn’t want. They often came to escape economic hardships in their own country or to escape war, famine, drug violence, threats, danger, or religious persecution. Our Statue of Liberty asks us to take in “your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free.”15 The immigrants were often rejected, abused, and forced to live in unsafe conditions, and had little legal recourse.
The word Hebrew means “to cross over” or, said another way, “to be a border crosser.” Hebrews were almost always strangers in a strange land. Sometimes the prevailing culture welcomed them, and sometimes it oppressed them.
Jesus was a sojourner, a stranger in a strange land, who was accepted by some but rejected and killed by others.
We are told to care for the “least of these,” which means we are asked to feed and clothe and care for the stranger in the same way we would do for our family or our friends. The individuals and nations that don’t do this are cursed. “Cursed is the one who perverts the justice to the stranger, the fatherless, and widowed.”16
What policies and actions might result from our understanding and care for the immigrant? The Democratic and Republican stances on this issue show a clear division about how to treat the immigrant. All the Republican candidates, in one way or another, want to get rid of some, if not most, of these people.
Donald Trump’s position is the most extreme. He would deport 11 to 12 million undocumented immigrants, which would be expensive and impractical. Trump would build a wall between Mexico and the U.S. (to block the arriving Mexicans, who make up only about 50% of illegal immigrants) even though the cost of the wall would be prohibitive. Trump would ban all