Torch, Spring/Summer 2012

Unfortunately, that’s not an entirely absurd scenario. Already, states like Arizona and Alabama have passed laws that make it a crime to knowingly transport someone without legal status “in furtherance of the unlawful presence of the alien.” Legal experts are divided on whether or not that would include driving an undocumented neighbor to church or, following the example Jesus gives of neighborly love in the parable of the Good Samaritan, transporting someone injured along the side of the road to get help. Ultimately it will likely fall to the courts to parse the ambiguous language of these bills, but it is troubling that the bills specifically except police and first responders — and not pastors or church volunteers — from liability for transporting undocumented immigrants. A youth pastor friend of mine in Arizona wrestles with this question on a regular basis. By driving the church van to pick up kids for youth group, he is arguably violating the law. He knows Romans 13, but also believes that civil disobedience is merited in this case — just as when Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego refused to worship King Nebuchadnezzar’s idol, when the Hebrew midwives spared babies’ lives in disobedience to Pharaoh’s decree, or when Peter kept preaching the Gospel despite orders to stop. He believes, as Peter replied to the authorities, that “we must obey God rather than men” (Acts 5:29). Scripture requires us not to “do justice” in the sense of law enforcement, but to “do justly,” and when a law is itself unjust, the Christian should not comply. We should also be vigilant to democratically oppose such injunction on religious liberty. A Call to Change The biblical charge to be subject to the governing authorities reads differently to believing undocumented immigrants. They are outside of the law, but they are almost never eligible to “go back and come the legal way” or “wait their turn in line” under current law. Many undocumented Christians are anguished by their unlawful status, and some have decided to return to their country of origin. Others have stayed, though, because they fear that they could not provide for their families if they left, and they are wary of the biblical teaching that “anyone who does not provide for their relatives, and especially for their own household, has denied the faith and is worse than an unbeliever ” (1 Tim. 5:8, emphasis mine). I honestly do not know what the right, biblical answer is to that dilemma. Certainly the specific circumstances vary, and not all undocumented immigrants were fleeing starvation in their country of origin — but some were. Here’s what I am sure of: we should do better, as a nation, to have an immigration system that does not force people to choose between following the law and providing for their family. The Comprehensive Immigration Reform Act that Christian groups, including the National Association of Evangelicals and the Southern Baptist Convention, have advocated would do just that. Most evangelicals, polls show, believe that we should avoid the extremes of either mass deportation or amnesty, and this bill would avoid either of these extremes. It would: 1. Make it harder to immigrate and work unlawfully , by ensuring that our borders are secure. 2. Make it easier to immigrate lawfully , to meet the labor needs of our economy, and to keep families together. 3. Require those currently undocumented to come forward, pay a fine for having violated the law — which is why this policy is not amnesty, or “free grace” 10 TORCH | Spring-Summer 2012 MAARTJEVAN CASPEL | ISTOCKPHOTO AND CARRIE SAVAGE | CEDARVILLE UNIVERSITY