Christian Nationalism?

[Swan]

The rhetoric around immigration issues and racism in general brought this issue to mind and I’d like to hear what others think of it. First, I’m an agnostic but I was a Christian for the first 45 or so years of my life (Catholic part of that time). My viewpoint was that Christ didn’t care where you were from or what color your skin was or what language you spoke. The idea that the arbitrariness of man-made borders should stop people from trying to feed and provide basic needs for their families - not to mention actually improving their chances of a decent life - seemed like nonsense (especially given that these folks are generally the victims of national and international policies about which they have little say and which ignore their needs and welfare). What I hear is a great deal of complaining that the US can’t feed and employ everyone (true). And there are the calls for English only speaking, approval for the separating of families who have been here for years (seems a bit cruel - most of the people have been working all that time). In short, these responses seem to be tied into a view of “what is good for America” and not “what is good for God’s children - regardless of where they were born”. Christian Nationalism. (it can be seen in other areas too - xenophobic responses by Christians to any issue would, IMO, fall into this category).

I just don’t think this was what Jesus had in mind - a faith where one nation’s needs supersede all others. Thoughts?

 

[WatchingMedia]

Basically you are correct. That is why Jesus did not get involved in politics.

The Church should not either,
unless there are over-riding factors such as genocide, starvation, or religious persecution,
Or morally objectionable government actions such as “abortion” or “gay marriage”.

However, any Catholic Diocese that chooses to send their money to other Countries in need, should do so.

Jesus never taught that any “government” should take away from one person and give to another person either. However He taught that individuals should be charitable.

 

[Black_Rose]

I just don’t think this was what Jesus had in mind - a faith where one nation’s needs supersede all others. Thoughts?

I find that risible with the notable historical counterexample of Cardinal Richelieu who, despite being in ecclesiastical regalia, he pursued a foreign policy that favored the interests of France during the Thirty Years War (1618-1648) by allying himself with the Protestant Swedes to combat the influence of the Catholic Hapsburg dynasty. Of course, the Thirty Years War within Christendom that initially was an ostensibly religious conflict between the forces of Protestantism and Catholicism, but later on as more parties became involved, the war was mainly about secular power politics not spreading religious dogma.

 

[CAnnElizabeth]

The inequities that you speak about are why many in our country are calling for real, true immigration reform.

It’s unrealistic to think that a country - any country, even the US with its broad history of immigration – would have completely open borders with no restrictions or requirements for entry and a path to citizenship. I doubt that you’ll find any country on earth with that kind of laxity; in fact, almost every other country has far more restrictive policies about long-term visiting and immigration than we do. As long as we live in a republic and not a Catholic theocracy, you won’t see the kind of wishful thinking you wrote about.

Certainly the “sending countries” have deep-seated social, political and economic problems that provide the impetus and desire for their citizens to seek a life here. There would certainly not be the same influx of illegal immigrants if they were able to make a decent living in their own countries. It’s gut-wrenching to leave your family, your customs, culture and language and settle in a new place just to put food on your (nonexistent) table or provide your children with a decent education and future.

These are overwhelming problems that can only be solved on the world stage – but in the meantime, we also have to address the reality of the illegal immigrants who are living here now (and in the probable future) with all the attendant economic and humanitarian issues, as well as providing a reasonable path to legal immigration.

It’s certainly not as simplistic as providing 100% amnesty for those who have ignored all existing laws then just opening the doors with a giant “welcome” sign. It’s a complex problem, it does push people’s buttons, and there are certainly no easy answers.

We are a nation of immigrants – but until the last 50 years, those immigrants, for the most part, abided by our laws. I consider this a very high priority item for our government, but I certainly don’t think there will be a speedy – or even just – resolution.