The thing that continues to puzzle me is that so many who say we were founded as a Christian nation, and it's the government's job to protect privileged status for Christianity, are also the very first to object when it is suggested that the Government should act Christianly toward the widow, orphan, and foreigner: "That's for individuals and churches to act out, not the government!"
Yeah, it's a special kind of hypocrisy. And one worth continuing to point out. The only thing I'll add is that I've found another kind of hypocrisy: one in which people vote for harsh immigration laws, but show unmitigated hospitality to the foreigner. And vice-versa!
Joseph, have you read Bonhoeffer's tome Ethics: specifically the Chapter, "State and Church"?
His thinking helped me immensely in 2015 when I began in my vocation in a regional refugee resettlement office in the U.S. opened by appointment from the Governor.
For your readers who have not read the chapter:
Bonhoeffer viewed the State as being under a divine mandate for maintaining law, order, and justice in a fallen world. He would argue the State is accountable to God, and the Church must ensure the State remains within its limits, aids victims of injustice, and resists the State if it becomes tyrannical or threatens the gospel.
The more resonant aspects of Bonhoeffer’s view on the State were written down here in my notes:
Bonhoeffer had a Kantian view of the State. He argued the State is not spiritually generative, but a necessary regulative framework, designed to uphold law and order in a fallen world.
Bonhoeffer argued the Church has a responsibility to do the following:
Recognize the Limits of State Authority: Bonhoeffer argued the State forfeited its mandate when it ceased to be a guarantor of justice and the purveyor of injustice.
Dialogue with the State and Question the Actions of the State: He held a high view of the Church, which meant he believed the Church is called to assist the State to be the State by holding it accountable to a higher law when it administered justice.
Aid the Victims of the State: He believed the Church should provide sanctuary to those falsely accused or harmed by state, regardless of their status, which he drew from his experience under the Third Reich.
Resist the State: This was his more controversial view. He, like his contemporary MLK, argued for taking taking direct action to stop the State when it overstepped its divine mandate.
Challenge the Idolatry of the State: Bonhoeffer warned against the penchant for idolatry of the State, in authoritarian regimes.
I think I am among a discerning audience on this Substack, so I will leave it to you to interact with his views as they relate to an asylee, a refugee, or anyone interacting with ICE under U.S. immigration law, as it is applied.
I thought these ideas might be a helpful prompt for discussion.
Thanks for this insightful and helpful comment. I haven't interacted much with Bonhoeffer, though I have many friends who have and researched his life and work in their doctoral studies. Your account reminds me of a story about St. Ambrose going to the Roman emperor and demanding that he repent for the casual execution of a group of dissidents before the emperor would be allowed to receive communion again. There's a delicate dance between church and government, but the government should always remember that the church is here to remind it of its eschatological place.
One of the elements people often overlook in these discussions is that many of the immigrants people complain about coming to the USA are only doing so in response to conditions in their home countries which the US government/military/intelligence agencies helped create and/or exacerbate.
This week's Esau McCaulley Podcast discusses this, both regarding other countries as well as ethnic groups in the USA. People blame a group for the circumstances that outside forces helped create, as though it were innate withing the ethnic group/nation's DNA.
The thing that continues to puzzle me is that so many who say we were founded as a Christian nation, and it's the government's job to protect privileged status for Christianity, are also the very first to object when it is suggested that the Government should act Christianly toward the widow, orphan, and foreigner: "That's for individuals and churches to act out, not the government!"
Yeah, it's a special kind of hypocrisy. And one worth continuing to point out. The only thing I'll add is that I've found another kind of hypocrisy: one in which people vote for harsh immigration laws, but show unmitigated hospitality to the foreigner. And vice-versa!
Joseph, have you read Bonhoeffer's tome Ethics: specifically the Chapter, "State and Church"?
His thinking helped me immensely in 2015 when I began in my vocation in a regional refugee resettlement office in the U.S. opened by appointment from the Governor.
For your readers who have not read the chapter:
Bonhoeffer viewed the State as being under a divine mandate for maintaining law, order, and justice in a fallen world. He would argue the State is accountable to God, and the Church must ensure the State remains within its limits, aids victims of injustice, and resists the State if it becomes tyrannical or threatens the gospel.
The more resonant aspects of Bonhoeffer’s view on the State were written down here in my notes:
Bonhoeffer had a Kantian view of the State. He argued the State is not spiritually generative, but a necessary regulative framework, designed to uphold law and order in a fallen world.
Bonhoeffer argued the Church has a responsibility to do the following:
Recognize the Limits of State Authority: Bonhoeffer argued the State forfeited its mandate when it ceased to be a guarantor of justice and the purveyor of injustice.
Dialogue with the State and Question the Actions of the State: He held a high view of the Church, which meant he believed the Church is called to assist the State to be the State by holding it accountable to a higher law when it administered justice.
Aid the Victims of the State: He believed the Church should provide sanctuary to those falsely accused or harmed by state, regardless of their status, which he drew from his experience under the Third Reich.
Resist the State: This was his more controversial view. He, like his contemporary MLK, argued for taking taking direct action to stop the State when it overstepped its divine mandate.
Challenge the Idolatry of the State: Bonhoeffer warned against the penchant for idolatry of the State, in authoritarian regimes.
I think I am among a discerning audience on this Substack, so I will leave it to you to interact with his views as they relate to an asylee, a refugee, or anyone interacting with ICE under U.S. immigration law, as it is applied.
I thought these ideas might be a helpful prompt for discussion.
(Kari Hoggard - aka "Agora")
Thanks for this insightful and helpful comment. I haven't interacted much with Bonhoeffer, though I have many friends who have and researched his life and work in their doctoral studies. Your account reminds me of a story about St. Ambrose going to the Roman emperor and demanding that he repent for the casual execution of a group of dissidents before the emperor would be allowed to receive communion again. There's a delicate dance between church and government, but the government should always remember that the church is here to remind it of its eschatological place.
I really think that loving one's neighbor is the thing we should all be able to agree on, right?
One of the elements people often overlook in these discussions is that many of the immigrants people complain about coming to the USA are only doing so in response to conditions in their home countries which the US government/military/intelligence agencies helped create and/or exacerbate.
This week's Esau McCaulley Podcast discusses this, both regarding other countries as well as ethnic groups in the USA. People blame a group for the circumstances that outside forces helped create, as though it were innate withing the ethnic group/nation's DNA.