I wish I had a dollar for every time I’ve heard the phrase “the rule of law” batted around in the immigration issue. The best way to stop illegal immigration is to make it legal. Reform the system. Offer many more workers visas because we need them. And for heaven sake’s, stop this inhumane practice of family detention.
Yes we are a nation of laws. Nine times out of 10 we should obey those laws. When those laws are unjust or inhumane, they need to be changed. Sometimes thoughtful disobedience of unjust laws is the way they get changed.
The recent exoneration of The Friendship Nine by a South Carolina Court illustrates this well.
These young men were sentenced to 30 days of hard labor for going into a white five and dime. They were intentionally breaking the law, because the law was unjust. Were they doing the right thing? History undoubtedly will say yes.
I’m particularly amused when I hear Christians tote the phrase “rule of law.” They are quick to quote Paul’s comment in Romans about obeying the governing authorities. The irony in this is that Paul wrote many of his letters from a prison cell. He was there because he had disobeyed the governing authorities by preaching the gospel.
The Bible is filled with stories of civil disobedience. Recently we read the story of the Magi, who were instructed by Herod to report back to him as to the location of the child. They do not do so. In fact they intentionally take an alternate route home.
The central story of the Christian faith is the crucifixion of Jesus of Nazareth. Crucifixion was the primary means of capital punishment by the Roman Empire. Jesus was likely executed for sedition. The sign over his head said “King of the Jews.” His proclamation of the reign of God was a threat to the kingdoms of Herod and Caesar.
Thousands of early Christians went to their death for defying the state, which demand that they burn incense to Caesar. Saying that Jesus was Lord was a very political statement. It meant that Caesar was not. saying that Jesus was the Son of God was an affront to every Roman coin clearly stating that Augustus was the Son of God. The history of Christianity is the history of civil disobedience.
The apostle Paul may advocate obeying the governing authorities, but he would have no qualms disobeying immoral or unjust laws. It’s high time that we recognize our policies of immigration and detention are immoral, xenophobic and impractical.
An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for the law.
—Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Bishop Michael Rinehart 
January 29, 2015 at 9:14 am
Not all laws are perfect, but focusing on immigration alone, unrestricted immigration is problematic. Your position is based on your warm and fuzzy liberal feelings but not reality based. Many illegal immigrants are good people, true enough, but there is a path to citizenship and they must take it. You casually forget the potential threat of terrorists entering more easily under relaxed immigration policies, and the cost burdened by American taxpayers. Even third world countries and places like Mexico have immigration laws to protect their sovereignty, but I suppose this information is difficult to grasp if your mind is already made up.
January 29, 2015 at 9:17 am
“But so suppose this information is difficult to grasp if your mind is already made up.” I couldn’t have put it better.
January 29, 2015 at 3:15 pm
Thank you Bishop. Some laws are just, and some are unjust. Laws often change, and not always in a progressive fashion wherein the changes are for more inclusive, moral, and magnanimous reasons. I have had similar conversations with people, and I often get a cold, dead stare when I say “you insist laws must be obeyed. Have you always reported cash income to the taxing authorities? Have you always obeyed the speed limit? Did you never consume alcohol until the legal age? Never tried pot? But you selectively point the ‘obey the law’ finger at others?” That shuts them up quickly. I doubt I change anyone’s mind, but at least they have to find another argument. Specifically regarding immigration, I am usually met with silence when I say “do you think your ancestors were law abiding in their attempts to get here to the US? Were honest about their health? Honest about their sponsors here? Honest about their political affiliations? You are certain there was no deception by your European ancestors in gaining entry to the U.S?”
January 29, 2015 at 3:18 pm
John Flanagan – I take issue with your concern of terrorist access to the US with relaxed immigration laws. Be mindful that all 19 hijackers (and the 20th in Minnesota) had valid student visas. They FOLLOWED THE LAW. Also be mindful that the worse terrorist attack on the US before 9/11 and since 9/11 was conducted by a US citizen and ex US Army soldier – Timothy McVeigh.
January 29, 2015 at 3:19 pm
I couldn’t agree with you more John. I feel sorry for SOME of the immigrants as well, but it’s time to look at the reality of the situation. Currently my church is begging for money to do needed repairs around the church. The financial needs of my own family has increased greatly since August. As a taxpayer, I cannot take on new taxes to pay for these immigrants. I am getting tired of the Bishop constantly lecturing on this immigration issue. Is he trying to turn people away from the Lutheran faith? My church is having severe financial problems and so are many other churches, let’s talk about that and try to solve that problem.
January 29, 2015 at 3:20 pm
So it’s impossible for a terrorist to enter the country under relaxed immigration laws? Sorry, Suzanne, I’m not willing to risk it.
January 29, 2015 at 3:27 pm
There are no documented cases of any terrorists coming across our southern border. Not one. If they wanted in they would come through Canada. Our border policy is racist.
January 29, 2015 at 3:31 pm
“Documented” I think you said it all.
January 29, 2015 at 4:03 pm
Linda, it is possible for a terrorist to get into this country ANY WAY – legally, illegally, relaxed laws or strict laws. That is my point. Minimizing risk for terrorists getting in, and staying in, has less to do with relaxed or strict entry laws and more to do with 1) fully vetting legal requests to enter via student/work/travel visas, and 2) maintaining all the pillars of law enforcement (informants, intelligence, investigation, deportation) regarding potential terrorists who are here, regardless of how they got here. My point is that suggesting “illegal immigrants broke the law so they must be deported” doesn’t belong in the same conversation with “what can we do to prevent potential terrorists from getting in”. These are two separate issues, and should not be thrown together as a cause/effect or risk/benefit scenario. One recent example: many opposed Obama’s recent Executive Order on immigration because “now there is no way to remove terrorists who are already here in the US.” That argument assumes that before the EO there was a terrorist removal mechanism and the EO somehow eliminated it. Those are not the facts – you can read the EO for the facts. The EO changed nothing about how we remove terrorists already here. Nothing. The same procedures for investigation and deportation are in place. But that didn’t stop people from complaining did it? The complaining was inflammatory, emotional, and based on false information. What’s worse, the complaining turned the EO from a way to hold off deporting parents of US CITIZEN CHILDREN (provided the parents pass certain criteria), into an abandonment of deportation rules for potential terrorists who are already here.
January 29, 2015 at 4:39 pm
The Bishop refers to no CASES documented regarding terrorists and the Southern US border. He is not referring to undocumented immigrants. There are many legal ways to enter the US and cause harm. There are also illegal ways. But the reality is that during the last two decades we have as many cases of US citizens conspiring or causing terrorist attacks here as we have foreigners who caused terrorist attacks here. As I said, the 20 who caused the 9/11 attacks all entered legally. The “terrorism” word is a red herring to the entire immigration discuss. It is a distraction from the issue of mostly Hispanic immigrants entering the country illegally through the Southern border, and then working illegally in the US for years, living, working, having children. All the while paying sales taxes and NOT collecting any tax supported benefits (other than children attending school and ER visits to state supported hospitals). What new taxes are being imposed on you Ms. Young, to support these immigrants? Illegal immigrants do not collect social security, workman’s compensation, unemployment insurance, medicaid, welfare. The cost of unpaid hospital visits is for the most part distributed to those paying health insurance (although the ACA will change that). The immigrants’ work, especially in the agricultural industry, contributes to maintaining lower food prices for everyone. They are hired by companies that DON’T OBEY THE LAW because they hire illegal immigrants. Are you upset with companies that don’t obey the law? What punishment should be imposed on companies that break the law and hire illegal immigrants? They pay cash, and don’t provide W-2’s, also against the law. So you see there are at least two sides to this “obey the law or pay the consequence” discussion. That is the point of this article. Sometimes not obeying the law is done to focus attention on consequences. Not obeying the law can be civil or criminal disobedience, depending on the law not being obeyed. The Bishop’s point is that breaking some laws often serves, either ironically or by design, a greater cause then obeying them, and there is much in the Bible to support that contention. I’d add there is much in human history, and especially in the last 175 years of US history, to support that.
January 29, 2015 at 10:51 pm
I was making the point that there have not been any documented cases as in there aren’t any cases documented in the books,YET. I did not mean as in documented or undocumented people.
As far as which taxes are being raised, if those children are going to public school there is this thing called school tax which I pay. So there’s one tax for you. They are also not paying income tax, so guess what my income tax has to also support. The more illegals allowed to stay, the more those taxes go up.
Are you kidding me that illegals do not get SS, Medicaid or welfare? What rock are you living under. I work in the healthcare field. I work with illegals wanting transplants in this country. Everyone of those illegal immigrants have social security, Medicaid, and/or some type of welfare from this country that you and I are paying for with no share of cost to them. I also see US CITIZENS not receiving these benefits and being denied transplants because they will not be able to pay for the anti-rejection drugs after transplant. What would you say if that kidney transplant your relative needs goes to an illegal immigrant because your relative can’t pay the cost of the medication?
Yes, it’s true that the cost of unpaid hospital visits are distributed to those paying insurance, but how is this fair. I don’t want my premiums going up because of this. Another example would be car insurance. If an illegal person hits your car and has no insurance do you smile and say that’s okay my insurance will pay for it. Yes it will but guess what happens when you get your next premium. Yes, I understand there are many citizens running around without health insurance or car insurance, so why would we want to add to this.
And yes as a matter of fact, those companies hiring illegals as well as those who hire citizens and pay them under the table need to be punished as well. I never said they shouldn’t.
When I speak of illegal immigrants, I’m speaking about ALL illegal immigrants, not just Hispanic and I don’t care which border they cross. Obviously living in Texas the focus is on those that are Hispanic.
We are never going to agree on this issue. My biggest complaint in all of this is why the Bishop spends so much time talking about it when there have got to be other issues that demand his attention and would make for good discussion. We get it, he is for illegal immigration but many of us are not. Why is he trying to divide the members of his Synod? Yes, I know he’s not trying but that is what is happening because I’ve talked to many Lutherans about this issue and they do not agree with the Bishop. He’s not running for office that I know of, so it’s time to move on and stop isolating members.
January 30, 2015 at 7:26 am
Regarding social security, NO ONE, US citizen or illegal or legal immigrant, collects social security benefits unless they have paid in the required amount, and unless they are at least 62 years old. Some immigrants work on the books and under social security numbers belonging to others (false id scenario). They pay social security taxes but will be unable to collect at age 62 because of the documentation required to file for social security. Some immigrants are known to the immigration system, and are provided true social security cards for identification purposes and for paying social security taxes. What would I say if I was denied a medical treatment while an illegal immigrant received that treatment? I’d say MY health insurance policy stinks. I’d say time to fix our health insurance system. We did that with ACA, thankfully. But how in the world can I say that I because of my citizenship status somehow deserve that treatment and someone who is not a citizen doesn’t?
I worked in federal law enforcement for 20 years. One GREAT thing about our country, with all its blemishes, is that in the criminal justice system, your status as a citizen means NOTHING regarding due process. When charged criminally, all are afforded the same due process rights and all Constitutional protections apply. We do NOT say “you aren’t here legally, so guess what, you don’t have a right to remain silent. You don’t have a right to a jury by your peers, you don’t have a right to counsel. You don’t have an expectation of privacy”. We say basically that our system is so good, so compassionate, so important to maintain, that we extend those constitutional benefits to all who live within these borders. Now THAT is something to be proud of.
Most importantly, I am stunned by the lack of compassion I hear in your words, as well as the words of countless other Christians who oppose immigration reform and claim that because they broke the law, illegal immigrants should be deported, no ifs ands or buts. I have athiest and agnostic friends who offer more compassion than many who claim to be Christian and follow the footsteps of Christ. Christianity is NOT easy – it makes us uncomfortable, forces us to examine just exactly how we put Jesus’ commands into action. It is in your face compassion. When the rubber meets the road, Christianity says choose compassion, choose forgiveness, choose life, choose inclusiveness. It can be very difficult to balance those CHARGES of Christianity when one holds other political or social notions. But ultimately, if we are Christian, we must do what Jesus would do. Even if it hurts and even if it contradicts our worldview.
You are right, we will never agree on this issue. But I hope others who read this will see that Christianity calls us to be Christians first. Not Americans, not US citizens, not legal or illegal immigrants, but Christians. That requires guts and also sometimes requires that law be exposed for its limitations as well as its guarantees.
January 30, 2015 at 7:46 am
I know what’s in my heart and more importantly God knows what’s in my heart. You feel that my words show a lack of compassion. I see a lack of common sense in yours. It is possible to be a good Christian and a good US citizen at the same time, following the laws of the land. This is my last comment on the matter. There are some issues that could be debated until the end of time without any progress made in either direction. Have a good day.
January 30, 2015 at 9:18 am
God knows what is in all our hearts, regardless of our actions. My questions for those reading this article and commentary are these: What do people see in our actions? What do people hear in our words? What do people witness when they see and hear Christians say “no” to illegal immigrants because of lawbreaking? Witness is twofold – we witness our Christianity to the world, and the world witnesses our witness.
I believe it is not just our job to be true to God in our hearts. If that was all Christianity required it would be easy! I believe it is also our job to be true to God in words and action. Even when difficult, even when it forces breaking ranks, or breaking laws, or breaking hardened hearts.
I believe we are faced with issues today (as throughout history) that challenge our notion of Christianity and the way we play it in the world – immigration, racism, minorities and law enforcement, gay rights. These issues, just as the issues faced by multitudes in Jesus’ day, force us to reevaluate our Christianity, our relationship with God, our relationship with our neighbor. They force us to reevaluate our talk and our walk.
January 31, 2015 at 9:58 am
The Term “unjust laws” is totally subjective. Civil disobedience is unlawful and should be punished by penalties strong enough to prevent others from following. The proper way for Citizens to protest is through the political processes that are available to all.
January 31, 2015 at 6:37 pm
Philip, the term “proper” is also totally subjective. What is proper to one is improper to another. Many changes throughout history involved protesting unjust laws, including civil disobedience, revolutions and treason, including our own country’s history.