Great post! The Diakonia Task Force did a survey, available on their website I think, that affirms the hunch that in general deacons don't take a very active role in being prophetic critics of waste and injustice. I have, however, seen deacons take on this role in powerful ways. Some examples are: finding legal services for immigrants, advocating for better immigration laws, and one church that found a pro bono legal organization to help someone fight an unjust landlord. All of these examples started with an individual coming to the deacons for benevolence and were moved towards justice because the deacons thought in a creative long term way about the situation they were presented with.
I agree, Bread for the World is a helpful resource that focuses directly on waste and injustice. They were even recommended to CRC churches by Synod in 1979.
Hi Doug: If you have comments about the Commitment to My Immigrant Neighbor Pledge this would be a great place to post them. Others who have already posted here will probably get an alert that more people have jumped in on this conversation and maybe they will respond. On the other hand trying to start a general discussion on immigration under this specific post might not get a big response... you could also start a new topic/thread in this Social Justice Advocates section and see if it gets some more discussion going around the issue of immigration.
The question about people having a “justice based right to immigrate to the U.S.,” is an important one. According to our Constitution people have the right to apply for immigration and congress has the right to set laws for yes or no on who gets in. In 2010 the U.S. said yes to about 140,000 Mexican applicants, including children, but we employed and received income taxes through false social security numbers from well over 4 million Mexican immigrants.
Another question is, are we, as a part of the current immigration system, breaking God’s law regarding fair loving just treatment of all people including the alien within our gates? Synod 2010’s answer is yes.
Also, I think, given our history and current context, even though it is our right, it would be an ironic injustice of biblical proportions for the U.S. to deny all immigration requests.
See point 5 to read what the Commitment to My Immigrant Neighbor Pledge says about borders...
“We commit to be advocates for the following principles in order to make our immigration system more functional and just:
1. Reforms in our family-based immigration system that reduce the waiting time for separated families, maintain the constitutional rights of birthright citizenship and the ability of immigrants to naturalize;
2. An opportunity for undocumented immigrants to earn a path towards permanent legal status by satisfying specific rigorous criteria;
3. A viable guest worker program that creates legal avenues for workers and their families to enter our country and work in safety with their rights and due process fully protected;
4. A framework to generate solutions to the root causes of migration, such as economic disparities between sending and receiving nations;
5. Border enforcement and protection initiatives that are both consistent with humanitarian values and allow the authorities to enforce the law and implement immigration policy."
I think it is important to note that the CRC’s involvement in immigration began with a young CRC congregation realizing that many of its people who were being baptized, becoming members, and taking the Lord’s Supper, were undocumented immigrants. The Elders weren’t sure how to respond biblically or legally so the question went to Classis and then Synod. After much prayer, bible study, and conversation Synod came to an almost unanimous conclusion that being undocumented should not prevent someone from being baptized.
Synod also concluded that the church can’t simply ignore the law but that, given our system of government, it should advocate for less burdensome laws. You have to understand, the authors of the report to Synod are Pastors, Elders and CRC members from various backgrounds across the U.S. They experienced the negative impact of our current immigration policy on the lives of people in their churches and towns. Their hearts are broken because of the pain they’ve seen in the lives of people they love. Somewhere on the Network someone recently wrote something about mercy, that the church forgot about mercy, this cause isn’t being driven by politics or CRC bureaucrats, it’s being driven by mercy.
When I work on advocacy for this issue I’m not concerned about the Board of Trustees or the Denominational Offices. I’m concerned about honoring the various Christians who put the immigration report together and in doing so requested that the whole denomination help them in working for the good of our immigrant neighbors. In my computer there are dozens and dozens of stories from CRC members who tried and failed to get documentation for immigrants and then saw families broken apart or new friends waiting for decades to enter. For every one of those stories there are dozens more I haven’t had time to hear. This isn’t a debate about the semantics of the U.S. constitution this is an effort to change laws that are ruining people’s lives. U.S. laws do not change until enough people ask. This is a justice effort born out of scripture, relationships, compassion, and a desire to defend the cause of those who are most vulnerable.
Most importantly, advocating for immigration reform only covers about half of what Synod 2010 asked of CRC churches in response to immigration. The rest of the report has to do with attitudes that embrace newcomers in our congregations.
(In response to b-ver, “Why is the church specifying this program rather than simply the Biblical principle? Do we not trust our members...” We do trust our members. Hopefully that trust is reflected in the work we are putting into this project they’ve given us. I’ll leave the question of why 1-5 vs other policies to others who may want to weigh in.)
Article 1 Section 8 under powers of congress says, "Congress shall have the power to... establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization." Maybe it would be more accurate so say it is up to other countries to decide if their citizens have a right to apply? At any rate the U.S. congress is supposed to set up laws that respond to those applications. I wasn't sure what you were looking for in your original question.
I think if you want to get at theories behind Synod's decision you would have to read the full report. I think it is on the OSJ website. Sorry if this doesn't answer your question. Not trying to "punt." Feel free to ask from a different angle if I'm missing it.
Yes, maybe Than will be able to answer more of your questions.
I think CRC members who shared immigration stories and 2010 Synod understand the difference between justice and mercy. They are calling on church members to treat immigrants with mercy and they are calling on church members to call on government to enact laws that are just. (Points 1-5 in the pledge are all about justice.)
On your critique of G, I understand your position, that you would prefer the OSJ not do policy development or advocacy on immigration. Be assured that in doing advocacy the OSJ doesn’t claim to represent the views of every individual in the CRC (even if we did congressmen wouldn't believe us), that’s why mobilizing individual members to speak up is so important. The OSJ does their best to communicate Synod’s recommendations to members but it is up to each individual to decide what to do about it. And in this case Synod has said, as it has with other non-confession issues in the past, that you can disagree with them.
Thanks Al. In addition to mediation I think consensus building workshops and polarity management are a couple of other effective tools that are underutitilzed in the CRC.
A most frequently used model for making difficult decisions is voting. This might be the only workable option in some situations but we should also be realistic about the consequences of a vote. It creates winners loosers and sets up conditions that will probably fuel ongoing conflict.
On the other hand we probably don’t need to be too concerned with an overemphasis on creation care in the CRC. I think if we counted up all of the sermons, Sunday school, and catechism classes given over the last year in the CRC that focused on creation care--as a response of gratitude for God’s grace and as a way to show love to our neighbors--their percentage of the total number would be pretty low. In my opinion, being concerned about these issues probably won’t cause the CRC to lose its way; divorcing the issue from the lens of scripture probably could.
To clarify my comments above. They are not meant to be taken as a criticism of the CRC or to devalue the many members, including farmers and the task force, who do great work in the area of creation care. It is only anecdotal evidence for the sake of conversation on whether or not the CRC is in danger of overemphasizing creation care. Apologies for any misunderstanding.
Posted in: What About Waste, Injustice, and Selfishness?
Great post! The Diakonia Task Force did a survey, available on their website I think, that affirms the hunch that in general deacons don't take a very active role in being prophetic critics of waste and injustice. I have, however, seen deacons take on this role in powerful ways. Some examples are: finding legal services for immigrants, advocating for better immigration laws, and one church that found a pro bono legal organization to help someone fight an unjust landlord. All of these examples started with an individual coming to the deacons for benevolence and were moved towards justice because the deacons thought in a creative long term way about the situation they were presented with.
Posted in: What About Waste, Injustice, and Selfishness?
I agree, Bread for the World is a helpful resource that focuses directly on waste and injustice. They were even recommended to CRC churches by Synod in 1979.
Posted in: Political Diversity
b-ver,
Under the system you are describing would preachers able make applications in their sermons?
Posted in: Commitment to My Immigrant Neighbor
Hi Doug: If you have comments about the Commitment to My Immigrant Neighbor Pledge this would be a great place to post them. Others who have already posted here will probably get an alert that more people have jumped in on this conversation and maybe they will respond. On the other hand trying to start a general discussion on immigration under this specific post might not get a big response... you could also start a new topic/thread in this Social Justice Advocates section and see if it gets some more discussion going around the issue of immigration.
Posted in: Commitment to My Immigrant Neighbor
Hi Doug,
The question about people having a “justice based right to immigrate to the U.S.,” is an important one. According to our Constitution people have the right to apply for immigration and congress has the right to set laws for yes or no on who gets in. In 2010 the U.S. said yes to about 140,000 Mexican applicants, including children, but we employed and received income taxes through false social security numbers from well over 4 million Mexican immigrants.
Another question is, are we, as a part of the current immigration system, breaking God’s law regarding fair loving just treatment of all people including the alien within our gates? Synod 2010’s answer is yes.
Also, I think, given our history and current context, even though it is our right, it would be an ironic injustice of biblical proportions for the U.S. to deny all immigration requests.
Posted in: Commitment to My Immigrant Neighbor
See point 5 to read what the Commitment to My Immigrant Neighbor Pledge says about borders...
“We commit to be advocates for the following principles in order to make our immigration system more functional and just:
1. Reforms in our family-based immigration system that reduce the waiting time for separated families, maintain the constitutional rights of birthright citizenship and the ability of immigrants to naturalize;
2. An opportunity for undocumented immigrants to earn a path towards permanent legal status by satisfying specific rigorous criteria;
3. A viable guest worker program that creates legal avenues for workers and their families to enter our country and work in safety with their rights and due process fully protected;
4. A framework to generate solutions to the root causes of migration, such as economic disparities between sending and receiving nations;
5. Border enforcement and protection initiatives that are both consistent with humanitarian values and allow the authorities to enforce the law and implement immigration policy."
Posted in: Commitment to My Immigrant Neighbor
I think it is important to note that the CRC’s involvement in immigration began with a young CRC congregation realizing that many of its people who were being baptized, becoming members, and taking the Lord’s Supper, were undocumented immigrants. The Elders weren’t sure how to respond biblically or legally so the question went to Classis and then Synod. After much prayer, bible study, and conversation Synod came to an almost unanimous conclusion that being undocumented should not prevent someone from being baptized.
Synod also concluded that the church can’t simply ignore the law but that, given our system of government, it should advocate for less burdensome laws. You have to understand, the authors of the report to Synod are Pastors, Elders and CRC members from various backgrounds across the U.S. They experienced the negative impact of our current immigration policy on the lives of people in their churches and towns. Their hearts are broken because of the pain they’ve seen in the lives of people they love. Somewhere on the Network someone recently wrote something about mercy, that the church forgot about mercy, this cause isn’t being driven by politics or CRC bureaucrats, it’s being driven by mercy.
When I work on advocacy for this issue I’m not concerned about the Board of Trustees or the Denominational Offices. I’m concerned about honoring the various Christians who put the immigration report together and in doing so requested that the whole denomination help them in working for the good of our immigrant neighbors. In my computer there are dozens and dozens of stories from CRC members who tried and failed to get documentation for immigrants and then saw families broken apart or new friends waiting for decades to enter. For every one of those stories there are dozens more I haven’t had time to hear. This isn’t a debate about the semantics of the U.S. constitution this is an effort to change laws that are ruining people’s lives. U.S. laws do not change until enough people ask. This is a justice effort born out of scripture, relationships, compassion, and a desire to defend the cause of those who are most vulnerable.
Most importantly, advocating for immigration reform only covers about half of what Synod 2010 asked of CRC churches in response to immigration. The rest of the report has to do with attitudes that embrace newcomers in our congregations.
(In response to b-ver, “Why is the church specifying this program rather than simply the Biblical principle? Do we not trust our members...” We do trust our members. Hopefully that trust is reflected in the work we are putting into this project they’ve given us. I’ll leave the question of why 1-5 vs other policies to others who may want to weigh in.)
Posted in: Commitment to My Immigrant Neighbor
Article 1 Section 8 under powers of congress says, "Congress shall have the power to... establish an uniform Rule of Naturalization." Maybe it would be more accurate so say it is up to other countries to decide if their citizens have a right to apply? At any rate the U.S. congress is supposed to set up laws that respond to those applications. I wasn't sure what you were looking for in your original question.
I think if you want to get at theories behind Synod's decision you would have to read the full report. I think it is on the OSJ website. Sorry if this doesn't answer your question. Not trying to "punt." Feel free to ask from a different angle if I'm missing it.
Posted in: Commitment to My Immigrant Neighbor
Hi Doug,
Yes, maybe Than will be able to answer more of your questions.
I think CRC members who shared immigration stories and 2010 Synod understand the difference between justice and mercy. They are calling on church members to treat immigrants with mercy and they are calling on church members to call on government to enact laws that are just. (Points 1-5 in the pledge are all about justice.)
On your critique of G, I understand your position, that you would prefer the OSJ not do policy development or advocacy on immigration. Be assured that in doing advocacy the OSJ doesn’t claim to represent the views of every individual in the CRC (even if we did congressmen wouldn't believe us), that’s why mobilizing individual members to speak up is so important. The OSJ does their best to communicate Synod’s recommendations to members but it is up to each individual to decide what to do about it. And in this case Synod has said, as it has with other non-confession issues in the past, that you can disagree with them.
Posted in: Using Mediation to Resolve Conflicts in the Church
Thanks Al. In addition to mediation I think consensus building workshops and polarity management are a couple of other effective tools that are underutitilzed in the CRC.
A most frequently used model for making difficult decisions is voting. This might be the only workable option in some situations but we should also be realistic about the consequences of a vote. It creates winners loosers and sets up conditions that will probably fuel ongoing conflict.
Posted in: REAL Creation Care? Or Just More Words and Trees Gone?
On the other hand we probably don’t need to be too concerned with an overemphasis on creation care in the CRC. I think if we counted up all of the sermons, Sunday school, and catechism classes given over the last year in the CRC that focused on creation care--as a response of gratitude for God’s grace and as a way to show love to our neighbors--their percentage of the total number would be pretty low. In my opinion, being concerned about these issues probably won’t cause the CRC to lose its way; divorcing the issue from the lens of scripture probably could.
Posted in: REAL Creation Care? Or Just More Words and Trees Gone?
To clarify my comments above. They are not meant to be taken as a criticism of the CRC or to devalue the many members, including farmers and the task force, who do great work in the area of creation care. It is only anecdotal evidence for the sake of conversation on whether or not the CRC is in danger of overemphasizing creation care. Apologies for any misunderstanding.