The concept of “protecting national borders” as we understand it is a relatively recent thing, only since the rise of the modern nation-state. Sure, there were kingdoms and territories and such, and countries and monarch would go to war over sections of land with distressing regularity, but the idea of fixed borders and travel control is much more recent than the Bible. Territories were important for taxation and defense, and if an army approached the frontier it was a big deal, but nobody really took the movement of individuals as a problem. Given nomadic life, even fairly large groups of people like the exodus from Egypt were not a big deal passing through unless the idea was to conquer a territory, like it was when Joshua led the tribes into Canaan. Up through the times covered in the Biblical era, people went were they wanted to, pretty much. Borders were largely permeable to civilians in the ancient Mideast and through much of western, European history.
The Mideast in the last couple of centuries has been the site of massive political and population issues, and they seem to keep getting worse since WWI. The establishment of the modern state of Israel has made it unimaginably more complicated and violent.
The current round of shelling brings that to mind. And commentators are weighing in all over the place. Both the UCC and my Presbyterian Church (USA) have long debated divestment in companies doing business with Israel. The mere fact many all it the Israeli occupation of the West Bank and Gaza shows a strong perspective (which can be argued both politically and theologically).
The Biblical flashback is, of course, the treatment of Arab populations by the state of Israel in the areas Israel controls. The Hebrew Bible is pretty clear that [biblical] Israel has certain religious obligations toward people within their lands, to not oppress them, to allow them the right to live and work and earn. Ironically, often connected with “because you were exiles in Egypt.” Many passages of the Hebrew Bible speak of the rights and need for beneficence toward the sojourner or resident aliens in Israel’s lands. Both from history and as part of the covenant, Israel had responsibilities to the people intermingled with it. I believe it still does. Certainly indiscriminate military actions affecting civilians runs against the biblical mandate and moral behavior (see just war theory at minimum).
For many to give the Israeli military and government a pass on the violence they rain down on civilians in territories they claim is bad history, bad theology, and bad politics. To be consistent, the care and protection of Arabs is necessary, and I’m glad many denominations are weighing in on the side of the victims.
Likewise I believe those parts of the Bible and many in the Christian Testament speak to our ongoing civic discussion about immigration. (Oh, that it was a civil discussion as well!) I find it disingenuous for some to ignore Jesus’ reminders to take care of the poor and the down and out and the rootless in society. I am particularly appalled at the dehumanization of children along the US-Mexican border right now. I realize that Jesus saying “let the children come to me” was not intended as immigration policy, but I commend the thought!
How you translate the words for the non-nationals in ancient Israel makes a difference. Some translations use “stranger” within your borders, some sojourners, some aliens or more recently “resident aliens,” some sojourners, or some more recently, “immigrants.” Right there, the Bible forces a more nuanced and humane conversation. Many have pointed up that Mary and Joseph and their son were refugees during Jesus’ early years. In general we have felt that “there was no room at the inn” was a bad thing, but now we are leaving the impression that there is no room at our border. Several provocative writers say we have at the moment a refugee crisis, not an immigration crisis. Actually, biblically speaking, the way to handle either one is with justice and compassion.
The U.S. government and many church types demanded that various countries open their borders to refugees from natural catastrophes or violence as a humanitarian imperative, yet resist doing that with the children from Central America now along the US border. I believe that is choosing moral inconsistency and deciding that some number of God’s children are not to be afforded human protection. That is bad democracy and bad theology.
Clearly, this is my position and not many peoples’ so I don’t expect all that many of you to agree. But I do want you to add some Biblical and Christian perspective to your thoughts and discussions about both the interchange of violence in Israel and the humanitarian and children crisis on the US-Mexican border. Our faith contributes to our discussion and behavior. But we have to be conscious about doing that. Let’s keep the discussion going.
And no matter where you come down on this discussion, I hope to see you Sunday!
In Christ,
David
Texts for Sunday
From the Hebrew Bible Genesis 28:10-19
From the Epistles Romans 8:12-25
From the Gospels Matthew 13:24-30, 36-43
No comments:
Post a Comment
Share your thoughts on this post in a spirit of love for God, yourself, and each other. All comments are checked before posting. While you may post anonymously, we encourage you to leave your name!