RSS
More Feeds












God's Politics

Love Casts Out Fear, Not Immigrants

by José Morales 10-14-2009

What is at the core of the immigration issue? What is the driving force of the debate? I say it is fear.

What’s at the core of the debate, in my opinion, is a cultural fear that grows out of cultural hegemony and cultural idolatry. Namely, the fear comes from the “threat” of having large numbers of immigrants who refuse to assimilate easily, in a country where the cultural majority sees assimilation as a moral virtue and as a necessity for socio-political well-being.

In other words, immigration is not a threat to national security; it is a threat to national identity. For since the first rounds of Native American extermination, the cultural “norm” has been set by the cultural majority, namely, immigrants of Anglo stock.  Which is why I am convinced that “white” is a political designation, not a cultural one.

I am even suspicious of the intention of some white liberals who, by using “diversity” and “multicultural” language, are really attempting to maintain cultural control in the guise of diversity “management.”  This cultural control avoids the real task at hand: de-white-supremafication. As these gatekeepers of Anglo-American culture see it, their power to set and sustain the norm is being challenged by backwater, Spanish-speaking, indigenous, Catholic, pre-modern, brown people who are a drag on the economy. What these immigrants are a drag on is the cultural hegemony of white society. Just as post-bellum white southerners feared a black cultural revolution and thus acted in horrific, dehumanizing ways to squelch any inkling of Afro-cultural insurgency, the cultural majority today fears specifically a Latino-cultural revolution which will rob them of their power to set the “norm.”

The sad tale to this saga for me, as a faithful Christian, is that this cultural hegemony has been, and still is, sanctioned and sustained by religion. God-talk is employed to ignore cultural fear and to maintain cultural hegemony, which consequently leads to cultural idolatry. Below are three ways in which religion is distorted to advance these ends.

  1. The dominant culture makes an appeal to “obedience of the law” as a moral absolute without first determining whether the contents and intents of said law, in and of themselves, are morally right and just.
  2. The nation that concocts these laws is given divine origins and divine purpose. In short, to go against the state is to go against God.
  3. The “white” majority, who have written the history of the nation (so as to soften up things like Native extermination, slavery of African peoples, and subjugation of women), are given divine preference and set the “standard” by which all residents of the republic are judged.

The cultural fear of the cultural majority is fostered by appeals to religion — in this country, by appeals to their Christianity. And I will specify: their Christianity.  Statistics show that the majority of African, Persian, Asian, and Latin American immigrants are Christian; yet these forms of imported, un-Americanized Christianity are not good enough for this republic and its religion.

As a Christian, I challenge their cultural-civil form of Christianity because as I see it, it is not Christianity. The Christian faith is one of liberating power from below, not oppressive power from above. This principal of liberating power is embodied in the Torah, where provisions were made to guard against economic exploitation, political oppression, and religious legitimation. The prophets remind the people of the socio-political mandate of the law, for they had emptied the law of its liberating power and had begun to use it for personal gain and exploitative purposes in the name of God — sounds awfully familiar!

For Christians, the Christ event is the fullest embodiment of this liberating power. It is in the political execution of Jesus on the Cross where he is ironically yet profoundly crowned king, and where God’s liberating power was demonstrated and the culture’s oppressive power exposed.

Lest I am accused of theological rambling, I wish to point out how this re-appropriation of the faith is applicable to the immigration issue. First of all, the immigration laws of this country are unjust, and should be declared as such by people of faith. Before we are called upon to adhere to these decrees, we should consider and challenge the racist, classist, ideological, and religiously exclusivist demons that inform and shape immigration policy as it now stands. To adhere to an immoral law is, well, immoral. For this reason, I have no problem encouraging churches, synagogues, and mosques to “break the law” and serve as sanctuaries for immigrants.

Secondly, a critique of cultural idolatry is in order. While God in the Tanakh is referred to as “the God of Israel,” God is not an Israelite — nor is God an American, for that matter. Cultural idolatry diminishes the beauty of the whole people of God and does not allow us to see diversity as a gift of God’s Spirit (Acts 2). Providing sanctuary is a bold affirmation of diversity and of diversity’s rightful place in the American cultural milieu.

Thirdly, I believe that faith and “values” language — i.e. “God-talk” — has its place in politics, since it is the language of many people who are affected by the political process.  God-talk should be employed only for the common good, however, and not for private or denominational interests. Civil religion used to subjugate workers for personal gains is rebuked by the prophet Isaiah (Isaiah 58).

Lastly, people of faith should be at the forefront in naming the fear, and illegitimizing it. For it is, after all, illegitimate fear. In fact, it is fear of the worst kind: fear of the “other.” And it is only by knowing the “other” and by loving them that fear is replaced by compassion and solidarity, which are core values of the sanctuary movement. As it is written, “There is no fear in love, but perfect love casts out fear.” (1 John 4:18)

To be clear, love casts out fear, not immigrants.

portrait-jose-moralesJosé F. Morales Jr. is a freelance writer, a public speaker and preacher, and an adjunct professor at McCormick Theological Seminary in Chicago. This article was originally in For You Were Once a Stranger: Immigration in the U.S. through the Lens of Faith, a primer on immigration by the Interfaith Worker Justice of Chicago, available online at: www.iwj.org.

Categories: Diversity, Immigration, Race
Share or bookmark this post:
  • email
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Google Bookmarks
  • Mixx
  • NewsVine
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • Yahoo! Bookmarks
advertisement


Comment Code of Conduct

I will express myself with civility, courtesy, and respect for every member of the Sojourners online community, especially toward those with whom I disagree—even if I feel disrespected by them. (Romans 12:17-21)

I will express my disagreements with other community members' ideas without insulting, mocking, or slandering them personally. (Matthew 5:22)

I will not exaggerate others' beliefs nor make unfounded prejudicial assumptions based on labels, categories, or stereotypes. I will always extend the benefit of the doubt. (Ephesians 4:29)

I will hold others accountable by clicking "report" on comments that violate these principles, based not on what ideas are expressed but on how they're expressed. (2 Thessalonians 3:13-15)

I understand that comments reported as abusive are reviewed by Sojourners staff and are subject to removal. Repeat offenders will be blocked from making further comments. (Proverbs 18:7)

  • mamav
    We can stop the gate keeping and worrying about numbers if we take more of a World Systems approach to the issue of immigration instead of concentrating all our efforts on U.S. soil. We must abolish NAFTA, and ensure that globalization benefits all countries equally. Migrants and other immigrants are, for all intents and purposes, "forced" immigrants. No one desires to leave their home country, their family, their native language and culture to arrive at a new lifestyle of fear and insecurity. If you're concerned about slowing down the wave of immigrants, perhaps improving the local economies of the countries from which our guests are forced to come would be a great place to start.
  • I wish I could buy everyone I know copies of Richard T. Hughes' "Myths America Lives By". He was my best professor in college and he has continued to challenge my thinking through his writing. I highly recommend this book in regard to this issue and many others.
  • senoralili
    it is not the numbers only, it is how immigrants are treated. that is something each individual can add or subtract to, beyond the law. How we treat the stranger and exile does define the individual as a righteous person or not. How do you treat the foreigner who can't speak English yet?
  • senoralili
    define permanent, in the US today 3 years is not a visitors visa! OK.
  • reformer
    You make a good point. On the other hand, the Bible doesn't call upon, say, Israel to welcome large numbers of Gentiles either. The Bible doesn't urge that immigrants take jobs of millions of natives.
  • reformer
    One million or so legal immigrants isn't sufficient. So how many million immigrants a year would be humane in your view?
  • reformer
    Jesus and his family didn't become permanent residents of Egypt.
  • reformer
    Are we immoral if we prefer to live in a safe country instead of an unsafe one?
  • reformer
    The USA admits more immigrants than any other nation on earth. If that is immoral restrictiveness, at least we stack up well by comparison.

    What is the moral number? Who decides if not the elected representatives?
  • rhemalogix
    Thanks, RegT49!

    It's always good to see how immigration is impacting other places, like Australia. Clearly, more work needs to be done to unpack both globalization's role in migration patterns and the host countries' responses and reactions to the same.

    ...Jose
  • rhemalogix
    Thank you for you comment and your passion!

    Couple comments of clarification:
    1--I don't believe in imposing my religious views on others. And that is exactly what I say. I do believe that faith should play a role in the political process, but only when it is for the common ground--which I also make clear.

    2--I don't believe in completely open borders. Nowhere in my piece do I endorse a "Come on in" policy. So this was a stretch on your part to assume this. I do believe that a sovereign state has the right to secure its borders. But I believe those borders should be humane.

    Thanks again for your thoughts!
  • RegT49
    Great post José. Thank you. Exactly the same debate is happening in Australia, and I think for the same reasons. The world / the U.S.A. / Australia is not a "safe" place, and people are desperate to maximise their safety. The unknown "other" threatens that safety. It's easy to understand, and very hard to overcome. darkmoses spoke above of perfect love. Jesus had this, I think Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King had this, and I think Nelson Mandela must have had a generous portion to be able to endure what he did and still undertake the transformation that he achieved. I think it's time for the "anglo" whites (and I'm one of them) to step beyond our comfort zone and live in the world that everyone else is part of. It isn't safe, but it IS the real world, and without sacrifice of individual safety for collective security we're all going to go down together, and it's not going to be pretty.
  • senoralili
    And we should remember that Jesus himself was sheltered as an immigrant in Egypt as a babe. His family FLED to Egypt, what if they had encountered the anti-immigrant violence we now have emerging in America? Jesus WAS the immigrant. Whatsoever you do...
  • darkmoses
    Thanks for this. Another important observation I'd make is that Jesus deliberately crossed borders - political, cultural, ethnic, religious, gender, and class - to accomplish his healing work. Jesus had perfect love, and therefore no fear of the stranger.

    For us to do likewise is a challenge, because it means going up against the very systems you describe that try to limit, manage, and deny "mixed" relationships in order to maintain hegemony and power. May we all find Jesus' courage in this day and age to address the injustice of "illegal" immigration!
  • stevenskattebo
    Nuclearferret criticizes the "worldview that the borders of a country or nation are irrelevant"

    They're not irrelevant; they are immoral, because they allow the rich to cross, but not the poor. That is anti-Christian.
  • PiperJM
    I agree with your observations. What people really mean when they talk about the melting pot is melting away any "dangerous" peices of culture, such as pride and identity, and leaving more innocuous forms of cultural representation such as food.

    When we are asked to love our neighbors, we aren't asked to love them after they learn our language, after they give up being proud of their ancestory or after they have adjusted to us. We are asked to love them as they are. This is what Christ calls us to. He never calls us to anything that is simple or easy to do. And we need to lean on Him in prayer in order to be able to answer His calls completely.

    Our system is broken and unjust. It is time for a change.
  • tlwinslow
    When it comes to immigration to the U.S., those coming from Mexico should not be treated the same as those coming from dangerous countries such as Yemen. Instead, they should be treated as neighbors, not "illegal aliens". Why does the U.S. continue to treat Mexico as a separate country anymore when so many Mexicans have moved to the U.S. or want to? Instead, it's time to work to incorporate Mexico into the U.S. as 10+ new states after inviting the Mexican people to dissolve their ever-corrupt fatcat-controlled Mexican federal govt., allowing us all to share the New World in peace and prosperity in a model bilingual nation. Learn about the nonpartisan Megamerge Dissolution Solution now making the rounds of universities and govt. agencies by clicking http://go.to/megamerge
  • nuclearferret
    So in essence, you have no problem proposing an imposition of YOUR form of religion and faith upon government, but not that of others, and that, boiled down to its core, the immigration policy should be "Come on in." Why bother adding any staff at ICE? They are unneeded in this worldview that the borders of a country and nation are irrelevant.
  • WaveTossed
    "First of all, the immigration laws of this country are unjust, and should be declared as such by people of faith. Before we are called upon to adhere to these decrees, we should consider and challenge the racist, classist, ideological, and religiously exclusivist demons that inform and shape immigration policy as it now stands. To adhere to an immoral law is, well, immoral. For this reason, I have no problem encouraging churches, synagogues, and mosques to 'break the law' and serve as sanctuaries for immigrants."

    I agree with the above. Current immigration law is unjust. The immigration quotas are far too limited, artificial, state-imposed barriers for those who come to our country to work and live.

    Much of the current anti-"illegal" immigrant movement is based upon racism and xenophobia. There are assumptions made, both among those on the "right" and on the "left": immigrants (mostly from Mexico, according to the stereotypes) only want to come here to collect welfare and Medicaid. These assumptions have shown themselves during the current health care debate. When Wilson called out "he's lying!" during Obama's speech, he was showing his anger and fear at the prospect of immigrants coming in.

    Now I'll probably read replies where some people will state emphatically, "we aren't against immigrants or Mexicans, we're against breaking the law." However, the laws being broken are unjust. No one should be punished for wanting to work and earn money.

    Also, no employer should be allowed to exploit workers in these instances of human trafficking. When certain people are labeled "illegal immigrants," they are de-humanized and end up having to work under sub-standard conditions for sub-standard wages; if anyone protests, the threat of deportation is brought out.

    The answers lie in changing the unjust immigration laws so that (other than filtering out known terrorists or criminals) people can come here and work legally. Also in hiring enough staff at the INS to break the logjam of applications for legal entry.

    To read more about sane immigration policies, check out http://www.freetrade.org/issues/immigration.html
blog comments powered by Disqus
click here for comments tech support
advertise here
  • MOST VIEWED
  • MOST COMMENTED
  • MOST RECENT
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here
advertise here


HOME | SUBSCRIBE | DONATE | TAKE ACTION | MAGAZINE  
SOJOMAIL | BLOGS | MEDIA | EVENTS | RESOURCES | ABOUT US  
Sojourners | 3333 14th Street NW, Suite 200 | Washington, DC 20010  
Phone 202.328.8842 | Fax 202.328.8757 | sojourners@sojo.net  
Unless otherwise noted, all material © Sojourners 2008