Donald Trump’s Immigration policy: A theological Response
Introduction:
Immigration[1]
is linked with other important global issues, including development, poverty,
and human rights. It has been a one of the major sources of population growth
and cultural exchange throughout the history of the United States. According to
the American Community Survey (ACS), the U.S immigration population stood up
more than 43.3 million, or 13.5% of the total U.S population in 2015. It was
known to have the most open Immigration policy in the world. However, Donald
Trump, a new President of the United States comes up with new Immigration
policy, and the world leaders were shock when he signs the executive order that
would ban 7 countries to enter U.S. The reason why the paper chose to focus on
the Trump’s immigration policy is because the U.S. has been the most
influential entity in world politics in the contemporary world.
II. The American Political Ideology: Conservatism
versus Liberalism
Americans have a national ideology, and it's
called liberalism but distinct from classical liberalism. They believe in a set
of principles rooted in the ideas of John Locke: democracy, limited government,
republicanism, self-determination, the rule of law, equal opportunity, and free
expression.
American liberalism argues that the government needs to act to
ensure equality among its citizens. In current politics, many liberals are
pushing for gay rights, affirmative action, open immigration, and similar
policies, while American
conservatism argues that the government’s main job is to protect freedom
and provide security. Beyond that, the government should stay out of people’s
lives and should allow people to do, act, and behave as they see fit. According
to conservatives, the government should promote freedom, regardless of how
expanded it might affect equality.[4]
III. Trump’s Immigration policy:
The illegal immigration was a signature issue
of U.S. President Donald Trump’s presidential campaign, and his proposed
reforms and remarks about this issue generated much publicity. Trump’s
immigration plan is based on three core principles: that the U.S. must build a
wall a cross the U.S.-Mexico border, that immigration laws must be fully
enforced and that ‘any immigration plan must improve jobs, wages and security
for all Americans’[5].
In order to fulfill his policy, he issues executive orders to build Mexican
border wall and travel ban, etc.
i)
Mexican Border wall: On 25th January 2017, Trump was
signing executive actions to jumpstart construction of a U.S. - Mexico border
wall and block federal grants from immigrant-protecting ‘sanctuary cities’.[6]
This plan also increases the number of border patrol and Immigration and
Customs Enforcement agents to be hired. At the same time, he ordered the end of
what Republicans have labeled a ‘catch-and-release system’ at the border. Now,
a house panel has revealed $1.6 billion plan for this construction, and the
wall money is embedded in a $44 billion homeland security funding bill released
by the House Appropriations Committee. The Republican Party leaders hope to
pass the measure before adjourning for the August break.[7]
ii)
Ban on travel and Suspension of United States Refugee Programme (USRP):
On 6th March, 2017, President
Trump signed a revised executive order to reinstate a ban on immigrants from
certain countries (the first proposal of travel ban stayed by federal courts), suspend
the U.S. refugee programme, and revise RAISE Act[8].
Here are some of the highlighted executive orders:[9]
a) On the ground of security threat, the new
travel ban blocks entry to the U.S. for citizens from six countries – Iran,
Somalia, Sudan, Yemen, Syria and Libya for a period of 90 days.[10]
b) The
new order suspends the U.S. refugee programme and delays all decision on
pending refugee applications for 120 days, while Homeland Security and Director
of National Intelligence review the procedures for identifying refugee threats.
Besides, Refugee should be cut down from 110,000 to 50,000 (Former President
Barack Obama granted before leaving office that he would admit 110,000 refugees
a year).
c) Number of Green cards (Permanent
Residence Cards) should be cut. They allow people over the age of 18 to live
and work in the U.S. and are currently given to more than a million people a
year. Under the proposals, green cards would be given to just over
500,000 people a year.
d) Employment-based
green card should be replaced by Points based (Skill based) system. And new
holders of green cards would not be eligible for any means-tested federal
benefits for five years after arriving.
e) Restrictions on immigrants getting in through
family connections, but Preference would instead be given to spouses and
children under the age of 18.
The initial reaction to
the revised order was positive among Republicans, and the House speaker, Paul
Ryan, also commented, “Advances our shared goal of protecting the homeland”. [11]
IV. The motives behind Trump’s Immigration Policy:
i) Protection
of the Americans:
Section 1 of the Executive order stated that
it was the policy to protect the U.S. citizens from terrorist attacks,
including those committed by foreign nationals. Each of the selected countries
is a state sponsor of terrorism, and has been significantly compromised by
terrorist organizations, or contain active conflict zones (The executive order13769
Section 1. d). [12]
Trump
also state that some of the foreign nationals coming from Islamic countries
were the cause of the numerous terrorist attacks.[13]
Thus, his first priority is to protect the American.
ii) Uplifting the U.S. economy:
From the outset of his presidential campaign,
Trump had promised to protect American workers with tough policies against
illegal immigration.
In a White
House speech (on 2nd August,2017) Trump formally endorsed the RAISE[14]
Act, which would cut legal immigration in half, favour skilled over unskilled
immigrations, and favour the spouses and children of the U.S. citizens over
more distant relatives. It would also eliminate the ‘visa lottery’ that
randomly allocates visas to countries that have not traditionally sent
immigrants.[15] Senator
Catton said that the current system is outdated and unfair for Americans, especially
blue-collar workers who work with their hands or feet such as those in
agriculture and manufacturing. He cited Homeland Security data and says only 1
in 15 immigrants comes to the U.S. because of their advanced skills.[16]
iii) ‘America first’[17]:
The ideology of ‘America First’ refers to a foreign policy in the U.S. that
emphasizes American nationalism in international relation and that is often
described as isolationist. Trump used the slogan and said that ‘America first’
will be the major and overriding theme of his administration.[18]
The White House also issued that Trump’s Administration is committed to a
foreign policy focused on American interests and American national security,
and the world will be more peaceful and more prosperous with a stronger and
more respected America.[19]
One of the ultimate goals of his immigration
policy is to control immigration and put American at the top of job application
pile. His administrative focus is to get jobs for Americans and manufacturing of
companies’ stocks back to America from Third World countries. The conservative
ideology is strongly going to Trump’s decision that Americans are given first
priority in every field regardless of how it might affect the others.
V. The Liberal view: A Clash with Trump’s Ideology
When the first executive order of travel ban
was issued on 27 January 2017, it was not going to be taken quietly. Organizations
that work on civil liberties and refugee relief as well as Left groups strongly
opposed in the street and Airport.[20]
This order was suspended soon (yet reinstalled on March) by federal judge in
Seattle because of national security concern.
i)
Economic status: Some economists
say the proposal risks hurting economic growth, which is already worthless. They
exclaim that fewer workers, whether American or foreigner, may cause less
growth unless everyone becomes a lot more productive very quickly. “If we were
to cut back dramatically on immigration, that would pose a risk to long-term
economic growth”, says Luke Tilley, chief economist at Wilmington Trust. “Because
of our slowing population growth in the U.S. and (falling) labor force
participation, we have relied on immigration for quite some time”. [21]
Jeremy
Robbins, the executive director of the partnership for a New American Economy
also said that the immigrants are a very vital part of what makes the US
economic work. According
to Meg Wiehe, who is the director of programs for the Institute on Taxation and
Economic Policy, the illegal immigrants also contributes so many taxes because
they have to pay property taxes for their homes or apartments and even sales
taxes, which was more than $11.6 in a year.[22]
Thus,
most of the economists are afraid and believe that Trump’s immigration policy
would lead reduction on US economic status, because immigrants contribute nearly
15 percent of the country’s economic output, though they make up about 13
percent of the US population according to a 2014 report from the Economic
Policy Institute.[23] Other critics of the RAISE Act feel that
selecting people on the basis of their economic potential is not what the
United States is all about. At the same time they feel that economically,
immigration is always a good thing, so that more immigration is always better
than less.
ii) Islamophobia[24] & Racism:
The two key themes seem to have been consistent throughout the presidential
campaign and these days of the presidency: Islamophobia and a broad hatred of
the non-white immigrant (the Mexican). The Trump’s ideology seems to elevate
what Bannon calls ‘Jehadist Islamic fascism’ the Islam. This is compared to the
idea of a ‘Jewish conspiracy’ against the German nation which had occupied in
Nazi’s ideology.[25]
According
to the BBC report, most of the terrorist-related attacks that happened since
the 9/11 bombing were caused by U.S.-born citizens. The attacks that happened
in Fort Lauderdale, Orlando and San Bernardino were caused by citizens born in
the US. The Rights groups say that the order targeted Muslims because of their
faith and that no refugees had been convicted of terrorism-related crimes,
because the most recent attacks were carried out by US nationals or citizens
from the countries not included in the travel ban. Nancy Pelosi, the House
Democratic leader also considers that Trump’s administration has consistently
shown discrimination and not national security.[26]
Thus,
most of the critics consider that ‘dislike or prejudice of Muslim’ is the
reason behind this policy because none of the listed countries did not terrorize
the US, while the ban does not apply to the nationalities of those who carried
out the 9/11 attacks, such as Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates and Egypt.
iii) Unbiblical: Most
of leaders of Christian denominations argue that Trump’s actions do not reflect
the teachings of the Bible, or the traditions of the United States. Jenny Yang,
the Senior Vice President of Advocacy and Policy at World Relief said that
Christ called us to care for everyone, regardless of whom they are and where
they come from. He added, “That has to be a core part of our witness, not just
caring for our own, but caring for others as well.”[27]
The United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, the official body of the
Church in America, also strongly opposes Trump’s executive orders, saying that
it is a Christian duty to protect all the brother and sister of all faith,
including Muslim. Some says that Christian religion is about love, and fear is
actually the opposite of love, so we need to overcome our fear, legitimate as
it may be, and act on the basis of love and concern for the poor.[28]
Some
of the evangelical leaders also have pointed out that Trump’s policies and
actions don’t reflect Christian values. Peter Wehner, a senior fellow at the
Ethics and Public Policy Center, compares Trump’s approach to morality to the
one held by the German philosopher Friedrich Nietzsche, which prioritizes
strength and power over care for the poor and powerless. Trump’s contempt for
the weak, his bullying nature, and lack of compassion and empathy form a
worldview that Wehner believes is “incompatible
with Christianity”. [29]
VI. An appraisal of US Immigration Policy:
After
September 11, 2001, Americans experienced a rude awakening to a new world
disorder as Richard A. Horsley said. Many people began to ask, ‘why do they hate us so? Or why do Americans
hate us so?’ [30] This
question is also echoing on U.S immigration policy, why did American do this?
Why do the terrorists mostly target an American?
i)
An American dream:
For the sake of national security, the
fundamentalists propose the policy of isolationism, a close-door policy, while
the liberalists expected to maintain peace and harmony by living with the
others. At the same time, the US government is deeply involved in the politics
of the other countries in the name of human right, democracy and World security.[31]
Anyway, what both are trying to accomplish is freedom, a freedom particularly of
the US citizens and the world at large.
As Jurgen
Moltmann explains the three dimensions of human freedom.[32]
The fundamental ideology of freedom may be seen in the mind-set of the
Conservative party, Donald Trump and his administration. Their understanding of
freedom is somehow associated with ‘freedom as dominion’, as they know only
themselves as determining subjects, and the others as their property or their
object. Travel ban, building Mexican border, suspension of refugee programme,
cutting number of green cards holder, and employment based green cards etc may
be considered as one way or another domination of the others; while, the
liberalist may try to maintain freedom on the basis of ‘free community’. They are willing to extend a helping hand
towards others irrespective of the immigrants and are interested in the welfare
of the others.
On Human Dignity, Jürgen Moltmann stated
that American dream may be identified particularly with the United States
as an important experiment and expression, but its aims are for everyone. It is both individualist
(the mission of America) and Universalist (for the good of humankind). For the American dream to be truly good it
must be good for the world, not just good for those who reside within its
borders.[33]
And then, he states the problem even more strongly that,
“If America has been chosen for the salvation of all nations and humanity in
general, then its policies not only can but must be measured against their promotion of the liberty of other
peoples, the self-government of these peoples, and their human rights. The idea
of ‘manifest destiny’ is dangerous if it used to expel, to conquer and, for the
sake of America’s own ‘national security’, to support dictatorships
contemptuous of humanity. Its merit is to be found in the possibility of
testing this power against its own claim. As a humane dream, the American dream
is a good and necessary one; but if it is no more than an American dream, the humane dream
turns into its very opposite”. [34]
As the purpose of both the
fundamental (Individualist) and liberal (Universalist) view on immigration
policy is freedom, ethically, it must be freedom with others for the welfare of
humanity. Although, the society of love may be an impossible human ideal, as
the fellowship of the organism is an impossible ideal for the cell, the human’s
task is not that of building Utopias but that of eliminating weeds and tilling
the soil so that the dreams may come true.[35]
ii)
The Divine law upon Civil law:
When Jesus confronted the religious leaders
and crowds about breaking Sabbath laws, he demonstrates that compassion
requires a reading of the Law that gives primary consideration to meeting human
needs.[36]
In Thomistic terms, there is divine law, eternal law, natural law, and civil
law.[37]
No area is more divisive in the immigration debate than the issue of
immigration law and public policy. People commonly say they have no problem
with immigration, but they do have a problem with people breaking the law. The
problem with this perspective is that it makes no distinction between various
kinds of law and assumes equal binding force for all law. This confusion,
resulting in a failure to differentiate, becomes particularly problematic when
some, appeal to supposedly Pauline theology (Rom 13:1-7), unquestioningly and
mistakenly compare the current civil law and public policy with a divinely
ordained mandate.[38]
The ordinances and regulations related to sovereign rights and civil law must
be seen alongside the needs, duties, and responsibilities proper to human
rights and natural law.
Quoting Thomas Aquinas, Martin Luther King
Jr. put it this way, “An unjust law is a
human law that is not rooted in eternal law and natural law”. [39]
He means that any law that uplifts human personality is just, while any law
that degrades human personality is unjust.
When
people cross borders without proper documentation, most are not simply breaking
civil laws but obeying the laws of human nature, such as the need to find work
so as to feed their families and attain more dignified lives. Moreover,
crossing international borders without papers in most countries is an
administrative violation, not a crime; it is not a violation of divine law or
natural law. Much misunderstanding and injustice occurs when immigrants and
immigration are perceived primarily as problems in themselves rather than as
symptoms of deeper social ills and imbalances, as matters of national security
rather than as responses to human insecurity, as social threats rather than as
foreign neighbors.[40]
Conclusion:
Americans have thought of themselves as
biblical people since the first settlements in New England. When the
constitution was being ratified, they claimed it as a new covenant. In
addition, the founding fathers conceived of themselves as establishing a
Republic, a new Rome.[41]
Their political contribution to the world history is rightly regarded as
Democracy, and the human relationship to God as well a covenant to society is
understood not as pure rule but as a covenant based on mutual freedom. So, the
political power is not a natural event to which one is simply subjected as to
the sun and rain, but rather a moral task of the whole community.
Today, the U.S becomes super power, rich,
well organized, and evens a Christian Country, the responsibility on peace and
harmony of world is much greater than the other countries. As Rev. John
Cumming, a Minister of the Scottish National Church, states, “The order of
God’s providence, and certainly the law of Christ’s Gospel, is, that wherever there is great power, lofty position, there is great
responsibility, and a call to
instant duty”. [42]
Thus in the global context, the U.S
Government should not try to preserve themselves against these immigrants or
simply open immigration, rather they should try to find out the roots of these
immigrations and act according to the divine law in order to maintain peace and
harmony in the world.
Bibliography
Books
Geisler, N. L.
“Thomas Aquinas.” In Evangelical
Dictionary of Theology. Edited by Walter A. Elwell. Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Baker Academy, 2007.
Horsley, Richard A.
Jesus and Empire: The Kingdom of God and
the New World Disorder. Minneapolis: Firtress Press, 2003.
King, Jr., Martin
Luther. “Letter From Birmingham Jail.” In From
Christ to the World: Introductory readings in Christian Ethics. Edited by
Wayne G. Boulton, Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey. Michigan: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994.
Koser, Khalid. International Migration: A very short
Introduction. NewYork: Oxford University, 2007.
Moltmann, Jurgen. God for a secular Society. Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 1999.
Moltmann, Jurgen.
On Human Dignity. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2007.
Moltmann, Jurgen. The Coming of God: Christian Eschatology.
Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996.
Niebuhr, H.Richard.
“The Only Way into the Kingdom of God.” In From
Christ to the World: Introductory readings in Christian Ethics. Edited by
Wayne G. Boulton, Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey, Michigan: William B.
Eerdmans Publishing Company, 1994.
Rae, Scott B. Moral
Choices: An Introduction to Ethics. Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1995.
Newspaper and
Journal
Ahmad, Aijaz. “Pre-fascism & the Muslis question,” Frontline, 3 March 2017, 25.
Carter, T.L.
“The Irony of Romans 13.” Novum Testamentum 46/3 (2004):
209-228.
Groody, C.S.C.,
Daniel G. “Crossing the Divide: Foundations of a Theology of Migration and
Refugees,” Theological Journal 70/3
(January 2009):656.
Prasad, Vijay. “Trump, turmoil and resistance” Frontline, 18 march 2017, 22.
Online Newspaper,
dictionary etc
“New Trump Travel
ban Muslim majority countries refugee” The
Guardian (6 March 2017). http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/06/new-trump-travel-ban-muslim-majority-countries-refugees
(2 Aug 2017).
“Travel ban reason
behind banning countries,” Travelers
Today (2 March 2017). http://www.travelerstoday.com/articles/37400/20170203/travel-ban-reason-behind-banning-countries.htm
(3 Aug 2017).
“US immigration proposals:
What's in the Raise Act?” BBC News (3
Aug 2017).
Tan, Avianne. “Without immigrants, the US economy would be a
'disaster,' experts say,” abc news
(16 Feb 2017).
http://abcnews.com/us/story/id45533028
(10 Aug 2017).
Black, Erik
“what-are-we-make-trumps-emphasis-america-first,” Minn Post (January 2017).
https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2017/01/what-are-we-make-trumps-emphasis-america-first
(9 Aug 2017).
Chip, William W.
“The Origin of Trump New Immigration Policy,” The American Conservative ( 3 Aug 2017). http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-origins-of-trump-new-immigration-policy
(9 Aug, 2017).
Diamond, Jeremy.
and Sara Murray, “Trump outlines immigration specifics,” CNN Politics (17 Aug 2015). http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/16/politics/donald-trump-immigration-plans/ (9 Aug 2017).
Gillespie, Pattrick
“Trump's immigration policy poses risk
to job market,” CNN Money (3 Aug
2017). http://money.cnn.com/2017/08/03/news/economy/trump-immigration-policy-job-market/index.html
(9 Aug 2017).
Green, Emma. “Where Christian Leaders Stand on
Trump's Refugee Policy” The
Atlantic Magazine(27Jan2017).https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/christians-refugees-trump/514820/ (10 Aug 2017).
http://quoteinvestigator.com/2015/07/23/great-power/ (12 Aug 2017).
http://www.epi.org/publication/immigration-facts/ (10 Aug 2017).
http://www.sparknotes.com/us-government-and-politics/political-science/political-ideologies-and-styles/ (5 Aug 2017).
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/jun/26/supreme-court-trump-travel-ban-ruling-analysis
(10 Aug 2017).
Kuruvilla, Carol.
“why these evangelical are firmly against trump,” Huffington post (22 June 2017).http://www.huffingtonpost.in/entry/why-these-evangelical-leaders-are-firmly-against-trump578d0d14e4b0fa89
6c3f6fc 2 (10
Aug 2017).
Murillo, Helen
Klein. “Trump’s New Executive Order on Refugees and Immigrants: A Summary,” The Lawfare (6 March 2017).
http://lawfareblog.com/trump-new-executive-order-refugees-and-immigrants-summary
(3Aug 2017).
Savransky, Rebecca.
“Majority of Americans approves of Trump’s ‘American first’ message,”TheHill(25Jan2017).http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316005/index.html
(9 Aug 2017).
The Hindu (12 July
2017). http://www.thehindu.com/news/international
/article19262113.ece (6 Aug 2017).
[1]
Immigrants are mainly categorized in three ways – Refugee (Voluntary or force),
Labour migrants, and irregular or illegal (undocumented or documented but stay
after visa or work permit expired) in Khalid Koser, International Migration: A very short Introduction (NewYork: Oxford
University, 2007), 17.
[2] Scott B. Rae, Moral Choices: An Introduction to Ethics (Grand Rapids:
Zondervan, 1995), 70.
[4]
In addition, there are neoconservative, libertarianism, socialism, feminism and
environmentalism etc http://www.sparknotes.com/us-government-and-politics/political-science/political-ideologies-and-styles/
(5 Aug 2017).
[5]
Jeremy Diamond and Sara Murray, “Trump outlines immigration specifics,” CNN Politics (17 Aug 2015), http://edition.cnn.com/2015/08/16/politics/donald-trump-immigration-plans/
(9 Aug 2017).
[6]
It is a city that limits its cooperation with the national government effort to
enforce immigration law.
[7]
The Hindu (12 July 2017) http://www.thehindu.com/news/international
/article19262113.ece (6 Aug 2017).
[8]
The changes in the Raise Act (The initials stand for Reforming American
Immigration for Strong Employment) would attempt to reduce the number of legal
immigrants by 50% over the next 10 years.
[9]
Helen Klein Murillo, “Trump’s New Executive Order on Refugees and Immigrants: A
Summary,” The Lawfare (6 March 2017),
http://lawfareblog.com/trump-new-executive-order-refugees-and-immigrants-summary
(3Aug 2017).
[10]“US immigration proposals: What's in the Raise Act?”
BBC News (3 Aug 2017), http://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-40814625 (10 Aug 2017).
[11]
“New Trump Travel ban Muslim majority countries refugee” The Guardian (6 March 2017), http://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/mar/06/new-trump-travel-ban-muslim-majority-countries-refugees
(2 Aug 2017).
[12]
Helen Klein Murillo, “Trump’s New Executive Order on Refugees and Immigrants: A
Summary,” The Lawfare (6 March 2017),
http://lawfareblog.com/trump-new-executive-order-refugees-and-immigrants-summary
(3 Aug 2017).
[13]
“Travel ban reason behind banning countries,” Travelers Today (2 March 2017), http://www.travelerstoday.com/articles/37400/20170203/travel-ban-reason-behind-banning-countries.htm
(3 Aug 2017).
[14] They propose two major shifts in existing
policy. One tries to address the question of how many immigrants should come
into the country. The other answers the question of which applicants should let
in—through a complete rewrite of the rules for point-based immigration.
[15] William W.Chip, “The Origin of Trump New
Immigration Policy,” The American
Conservative ( 3 Aug 2017), http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/the-origins-of-trump-new-immigration-policy
(9 Aug, 2017).
[16]
Pattrick Gillespie, “Trump's
immigration policy poses risk to job market,” CNN Money (3 Aug 2017), http://money.cnn.com/2017/08/03/news/economy/trump-immigration-policy-job-market/index.html
(9 Aug 2017).
[17]
In the late 1930’s and up to the bombing of Pearl Harbor, “America First” was
the slogan of a group that wanted to keep the United States out of World War
II. Charles Lindbergh was a leading
spokesman for this group and this argument. Erik Black,
“what-are-we-make-trumps-emphasis-america-first,” Minn Post (January 2017), https://www.minnpost.com/eric-black-ink/2017/01/what-are-we-make-trumps-emphasis-america-first
(9 Aug 2017).
[18]
Rebecca Savransky, “ Majority of
Americans approves of Trump’s ‘American first’ message,” The Hill (25 Jan 2017), http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/316005/index.html
(9 Aug 2017).
[20]
Vijay Prasad, “Trump, turmoil and resistance” Frontline, 18 march 2017, 22.
[21] Patrick Gillespie, “Trump's immigration policy…’
[22] Avianne tan, “Without immigrants, the US economy would be a 'disaster,' experts say,” abc news (16 Feb 2017), http://abcnews.com/us/story/id45533028
(10 Aug 2017).
[24] ‘irrational fear of, aversion to, or
discrimination against Islam or people who practice Islam’ https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/Islamophobia
(14 Aug 2017)
[25] Aijaz Ahmad, “Pre-fascism & the Muslis
question,” Frontline, 3 March 2017,
25.
[27] Emma Green, “Where
Christian Leaders Stand on Trump's Refugee Policy ” The Atlantic Magazine (27 Jan 2017), https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/christians-refugees-trump/514820/
(10 Aug 2017).
[28] Emma Green, “Where Christian Leaders Stand on Trump's Refugee Policy ”
The Atlantic Magazine (27 Jan 2017), https://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2017/01/christians-refugees-trump/514820/
(10 Aug 2017).
[29]
Carol Kuruvilla, “why these evangelical are firmly against trump,” Huffington post (22 June 2017), http://www.huffingtonpost.in/entry/why-these-evangelical-leaders-are-firmlyagainst-trump578d0d14e4b0fa89
6c3f6fc 2 (10
Aug 2017).
[30]
Richard A. Horsley, Jesus and Empire: The
Kingdom of God and the New World Disorder (Minneapolis: Fortress Press,
2003), 4.
[31]
According to the Pee Research Center, nearly 57% want the United States to deal
with its own problems and let other countries deal with their own problems the
best they can. Far fewer (37%) favour the U.S. helping other countries address
problems. http://www.people-press.org/2016/05/05/1-americas-global-role-u-s-superpower-status/
(10 Aug 2017).
[32]
The first one is freedom as domination in which the one is called free in this
struggle is the one who acquires the power and ruler. The second one is freedom
as free community which means the person who is free is friendly, affectionate,
open, pleasant and loving. The final one is freedom is the creative passion for
the possibility which means that it is not a possession, nor is it a quality
but it is a happening. Only who make use of their freedom remains free. Jurgen
Moltmann, God for a Secular Society, (Minneapolis:
Fortress Press, 1999), 154-158.
[33]
Jurgen Moltmann, On Human Dignity,
(Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 2007), 148-149.
[34]
Jurgen Moltmann, The Coming of God:
Christian Eschatology (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 147.
[35]
H.Richard Niebuhr, “The Only Way into
the Kingdom of God,” in From Christ to
the World: Introductory readings in Christian Ethics, edited by Wayne G.
Boulton, Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1994), 427.
[36]
Jesus responds that “the Sabbath is made
for man, not man for the Sabbath,” and that the “higher law” is that it is lawful, even required, to do good on the
Sabbath and, by extension, on every other day as well (Mt 12:1-14; Mk 2:23-3:6;
Lk 6:1-22)
[37]
N. L. Geisler, “Thomas Aquinas,” in Evangelical
Dictionary of Theology, edited by Walter A. Elwell (Grand Rapids, Michigan:
Baker Academy, 2007), 1198.
[38]
Paul says the Christian community is to stand under government because of
conscience (Romans 13:5). In other words, Christians stand under government
because it is right for God's children to be supportive of good government, not
simply because they are told by their governments to do so. Thus,
Paul’s
intention here is ironic and refers to an ideal situation evoking the audience
to awareness.
Paul subtly invites his readers to engage their conscience to evaluate and
arrive at an appropriate response.
T.L. Carter, “The
Irony of Romans 13,” Novum
Testamentum 46/3
(2004):
209-228.
[39] Martin Luther King, Jr., “Letter From
Birmingham Jail,” in From Christ to the
World: Introductory readings in Christian Ethics, edited by Wayne G.
Boulton, Thomas D. Kennedy, and Allen Verhey (Michigan: William B. Eerdmans
Publishing Company, 1994), 430.
[40]
Daniel G. Groody, C.S.C., “Crossing the Divide: Foundations of a Theology of
Migration and Refugees,” Theological
Journal 70/3 (January 2009), 656.
[41] Richard A. Horsley, Jesus and Empire…, 5.
Comments
Post a Comment