Ed Stetzer | Vox

Fellow evangelicals: stop falling for Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric

2018-11-06T12:57:52-05:00

Members of the Central American migrant caravan move to the next town at dawn on November 2, 2018, in Matias Romero, Mexico. | Spencer Platt/Getty Images

President Donald Trump is trying to fool evangelicals like me. This time, it’s using a false threat of an invasion from a “caravan” of poor people marching through Mexico to seek asylum legally. It should be obvious to everyone. But it isn’t — research shows that evangelicals tend to have strong political opinions when it comes to immigration, so they are distinctly open to this fear-driven message.

I’m a professor, pastor, and writer who serves at the flagship school of institutional evangelicalism, Wheaton College. I’ve spoken and researched the topic of evangelicals and immigration for five years, due to my concern about how this community seems to reject their deeply held values when it comes to welcoming refugees into our country. As I’ve seen the anti-immigration fervor rise among evangelicals, I’ve hosted an evangelical leaders summit and rallied evangelicals to the engage on these issues.

The Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College, where I currently work, partnered with LifeWay Research in May 2018 to poll 3,000 Americans about their voting in the most recent national election. The purpose was to understand evangelical voting patterns. We found, as other research projects support, that white evangelicals are highly motivated to support President Donald Trump around the issue of immigration. As his rhetoric around the caravan shows, Trump clearly knows this.

As evangelicals prepare to vote, we need to consider how this messaging has found purchase in our pews and, more importantly, how our faith calls us to respond. It makes little of the depth of God’s love for us in Christ by teaching us that our love for others is conditioned by country, race, or ethnicity. Regardless of political affiliation and positions, evangelicals need to see this culture of fear of others for what it is: un-Christian.

What evangelicals believe

Before I dive into the research, it’s important to explain how we determined the evangelical label in our surveys.

Evangelicalism is one of the poorest defined political and religious terms, yet it is ubiquitous today. One reason for this is a lack of consensus among pollsters as to how to determine and measure evangelicals. Today, many pollsters rely on combinations of self-identification, belief, denomination, or race as drivers of evangelical identity. The patchwork nature of the label means that many journalists and pundits are often working off different definitions.

In an effort to balance these different approaches, our study surveyed evangelicals by belief and by self-identification. To determine if they fit the profile of evangelical by belief, they had to “strongly agree” with four separate statements:

1. The Bible is the highest authority for what I believe.

2. It is very important for me personally to encourage non-Christians to trust Jesus Christ as their savior.

3. Jesus Christ’s death on the cross is the only sacrifice that could remove the penalty of my sin.

4. Only those who trust in Jesus Christ alone as their savior receive God’s free gift of eternal salvation.

On questions of immigration cited below, differences between self-identified evangelicals and evangelicals by belief were statistically negligible. But for simplicity sake, we will use the numbers from evangelicals by belief only. I should also note that this study occurred prior to the conflict over family separation at the border.

Using these constructs, we found that for evangelicals, immigration was a major factor in voting for Donald Trump in 2016. Sixty-two percent of evangelicals who voted for Trump listed immigration as one reason for their vote, with 15 percent saying it was the single most important factor.

We then asked these evangelicals what they thought of the Trump administration’s actions on immigration since he took office. We found that two out of three evangelicals said they support the Trump administration’s efforts to reduce illegal immigration, while 63 percent support recent reductions in the number of legal immigrants to the United States.

However, we found the most significant splits within evangelical responses on these questions when we broke it down by race and ethnicity. White evangelicals overwhelmingly back more hardline positions on immigration, with three-fourths wanting a reduction in legal immigration and 82 percent supporting the administration’s efforts on illegal immigration.

But few evangelical people of color agreed. Only one-third of African-American evangelicals and half of Hispanics supported reductions in legal immigration, with slightly smaller percentages supporting the administration’s efforts on illegal immigration — 35 and 47 percent, respectively.

It is hard not to conclude that far too many white evangelicals are motivated by racial anxiety and xenophobia compared to evangelicals of color. More research certainly is needed, but undoubtedly white evangelicals would do well to turn off cable news and listen to their sisters and brothers in the increasingly diverse pews of evangelical churches for a different view.

When it comes to immigration, evangelicals tend to be more anti-immigration, supporting reductions in immigration, tightening of borders, and (as other studies show) positions on refugees. How should Christians respond to these numbers, and, more importantly, how should Christians think about immigration and refugees?

First, the Christian faith demands we love immigrants and refugees

These numbers tell me that many evangelicals are not particularly good at loving strangers, aliens, and pilgrims. Yet throughout Scripture, we find this value is a central pillar of the Christian faith. In what Christians call the Old Testament, God places hospitality and protection of foreigners at the core of Israel’s ethical identity.

In two passages, God gives us the justification for why this is so important. In Leviticus 19:34, “The stranger who resides with you shall be to you as the native among you, and you shall love him as yourself, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt; I am the Lord your God,” while in Deuteronomy 10:19, “So show your love for the alien, for you were aliens in the land of Egypt.”

Notice this commandment is conditioned by Israel’s history: They were to welcome the foreigner because they too had been foreigners in a strange land. This same conditional theme is picked up in the New Testament, this time in relation to how Christians are supposed to live in light of Christ’s love for us. At its most basic level, we are called to love others unconditionally and sacrificially because Christ first loved us in the same way.

Political and media narratives tell you that distrusting, fearing, or even hating immigrants and refugees is a justified feeling. But scripture calls us to see ourselves in the immigrant and to love others as Christ first loved us.

Second, evangelicals need to be taught to love the stranger

Despite this “loving your neighbor” phrase, people do not naturally love the stranger. They do not naturally open their homes, their dinner tables, their churches, and, yes, their countries to others. We have an instinct to hoard, to protect what we have, and to insist others go find their own security and provisions.

More to the point, it is hard for American Christians to grasp the depth of suffering in the world when the grocery store is fully stocked and the emergency room is just down the road for many of us. This is not to say there are not real challenges and real needs in our country. Yet within our bubble of American evangelicalism, we often lose sight of how much suffering there is in the world.

But teaching people to love and show hospitality toward immigrants and refugees isn’t just about getting our own house in order — we must fight the counternarratives at work both in and out of the church.

We live in a culture where many political and religious leaders are teaching believers to fear the stranger. What is clear from the data is that this counter-discipling narrative is winning in the church, particularly among white evangelicals.

One recent infamous example was the Fox News guest who claimed immigrants in the caravan traveling through Mexico were carrying leprosy, smallpox, and tuberculosis and were going to “infect our people in the United States.” Despite having no evidence of this claim — and the fact that the last known case of smallpox was in Somalia in 1977 — this claim was given airtime on a major news network. These kinds of reports are not simply false but designed to provoke animosity, leading audiences in a culture of fear toward these people.

In other words, Christians are being conditioned to see threats where we would otherwise see suffering and a window to preach the gospel; to trade in our gospel mission for a false sense of personal security.

Love for immigrants and refugees is not at odds with sensible immigration reform

I have been, along with many other evangelical leaders, a strong proponent of US immigration reform. The system as currently constituted is not working and needs to be addressed. But too often, politicians seem more interested in using immigration as a means of galvanizing their base and demonizing their opponents than actually coming up with solutions.

When I and other evangelicals speak up on the importance of opening our arms to refugees and immigrants, I get a flood of complaints about open borders and references to George Soros. In emails and on social media, Christians whose profiles lead with tags such as “sinner redeemed by grace” unleash anger that often surprises me.

Love for immigrants and refugees does not mean we ignore immigration reform. Rather, it makes demands on the way we structure new immigration policy, the way we treat those who seek refuge and safety, and how we treat those already in our country.

My views — like many evangelical leaders who are part of the Evangelical Immigration Table — have more in common with former President George W. Bush’s views than George Soros’s. But in today’s world, Bush is often painted as an immigration radical by my fellow evangelicals.

Furthermore, Christians need to be careful of those who misuse Romans 13:1-4, a passage that tells Christians to live in a way that is respectful and honoring toward our governing authority, while recognizing that God is sovereign over kings and presidents.

It is not, however, a trump card for letting the government do whatever it wants. The government exists under God’s authority and is subject to God’s moral law and is not entitled to our unquestioned fealty. This passage has long been used to justify immoral, un-Christian policies under the guise of the government protecting its citizens. But it is a misunderstanding of the passage.

How, then, shall we live?

In future generations, I think our evangelical heirs will look back in disappointment on our response to the refugee crisis of our time. How could we have seen the suffering, heard the cries of anguish, and done so little? For evangelicals living today, it is easy to look back and say we would have fought slavery or marched along with civil rights leaders. It is altogether harder to actually make those sacrifices today in the face of suffering.

If this is indeed the “election of the caravan,” my prayer is that evangelicals will recognize the opportunity it affords us to speak about how these refugees are made in the image of God. As Christians, we should be driven by compassion for those men, women, and children. And as Americans, we should value a system that treats them fairly, in accordance with just laws.

I suspect that Christians will wake up this Wednesday morning and the so-called dangerous, filthy caravan of invading barbarian criminals will suddenly be gone from the political coverage. Oh, the asylum seekers will still be there. But the ads, the campaign speeches, and the tweets trying to stoke fears will magically disappear when polls close.

And white evangelical Christians will be able to go back to their lives, safe once again. That is, until politicians need us to be afraid again. There will always be another caravan, another group of marginalized or suffering people.

Our evangelical witness would be in a better place if we were less easily fooled.

Ed Stetzer leads the Billy Graham Center at Wheaton College. His most recent book is Christians in the Age of Outrage: How to Bring Our Best When the World Is at Its Worst, which addresses how often Christians now are driven by fear rather than faith.

First Person is Vox’s home for compelling, provocative narrative essays. Do you have a story to share? Read our submission guidelines, and pitch us at firstperson@vox.com.

Being pro-life means caring about all of human life. That includes being pro-refugee.

2017-06-26T12:32:44-04:00

On November 8, 2016, Donald J. Trump was elected the 45th president of the United States. This result came as a surprise to many because polls confidently predicted a Hillary Clinton win. But one thing was not a surprise: The majority of evangelicals voted Republican. Even after a divided and contentious primary season within the GOP, most churchgoing evangelicals did what they have done in the past and voted in line with the party platform.

What seems different this time is that many evangelical leaders are far more vocal in speaking against a candidate many of their constituencies supported.

And in the case of Trump’s executive order banning refugees from entering the United States, many evangelical leaders are also speaking contrary to what polls say their grassroots believe.

World Relief, an evangelical organization that helps resettle refugees in the US, published a letter to President Trump and Vice President Mike Pence in the Washington Post in February, signed by 100 evangelical leaders from all 50 states.

“As Christian pastors and leaders, we are deeply concerned by the recently announced moratorium on refugee resettlement,” the letter read. “We have a historic call expressed over two thousand years, to serve the suffering. We cannot abandon this call now.”

I was glad to be among the drafters and signers, and have my name counted and my voice heard, along with many of my friends.

Sure, this letter was intended for the president. However, it was also written in the hope of reaching evangelicals in the grassroots, many of whom who may agree with Trump.

What evangelicals believe

I am an evangelical. I’ve pastored evangelical churches, have four graduate degrees from evangelical schools, was a researcher for an evangelical denomination, am currently a professor at evangelical Wheaton College, and serve on the board of the National Association of Evangelicals.

Though I was not a Trump supporter (nor a Clinton one, for that matter), the many evangelicals who did vote for him come from the same faith family as I do — that group called evangelicals.

To understand evangelicals, most scholars use a rubric called the Bebbington Quadrilateral to explain what we evangelicals believe, including:

Conversionism: the belief that lives need to be transformed through a “born-again” experience and a lifelong process of following Jesus
Activism: the expression and demonstration of the gospel in missionary and social reform efforts
Biblicism: a high regard for and obedience to the Bible as the ultimate authority
Crucicentrism: a stress on the sacrifice of Jesus Christ on the cross as making possible the redemption of humanity

Understanding what evangelicals believe is important to understanding why so many evangelical leaders signed the letter to the Trump administration.

After President Trump released the immigration executive order on January 27, churches working with the National Association of Evangelicals through World Relief found themselves greatly concerned. World Relief has long worked to help the church be the hands and feet of Jesus to those who are most vulnerable around the globe. Now that work has been suspended.

World Relief has closed five local offices and laid off more than 140 faithful workers. These teams that have helped resettle more than 25,000 refugees over the past 40 years now find themselves with no one to serve because the doors have been closed. Christians are left to look themselves in the mirror and ask: Is this the moment to stand and speak?

Let me be clear. Everyone who signed the letter to the Trump administration supports a commitment to national security and appropriate governance in immigration policies. But we are called to show and share the loved of Jesus to the hurting (see the Bebbington Quadrilateral mentioned earlier) — so when we consider the refugee, where do we find the balance between the two? Our faith calls us to be sober-minded, but panic can often lead us in the opposite direction.

Facts are our friends

We want to respond to the refugee crisis with fact, and in faith, rather than fear.

According to a study from the Cato Institute, there is a 1 in 3.64 billion chance that any one of us would be killed by a refugee turned terrorist this year.

The refugee resettlement program has a strong history of success — people cannot walk here as they have to Europe. The US has one of the most intense vetting systems in the world, and it takes most refugees two years and numerous steps to actually arrive in the US. More than 800,000 refugees have been resettled in the past 15 years, with a remarkable record of safety.

Yes, I believe we are at war with radical Islam. And we need to be vigilant. But refugees are not causing the violence. They are running from it. And as a powerful and prosperous nation, we have the arms to help as long as we are willing to keep those arms open.

The current mood of this administration and many of its supporters when it comes to refugees is often driven by fear. But we must be the people who are always ready to search out the facts. We must listen to the tragic stories of the hurting people who are asking for help. The facts tell us that our vetting process is already extreme, and the real people in need move us to compassion. This means we don’t have to choose between the head and the heart to decide which side we are on. We can hear the facts and let our souls be moved.

Why evangelical leaders are speaking out against what the grassroots believe

Most evangelical leaders who have spoken out about the executive order have done so to decry it. Very few evangelical leaders have voiced support for the order. This is true for several reasons.

First, evangelicals have been involved with refugee resettlement for a long time and in a lot of churches. Many evangelical leaders have advocated for refugees, from all different faiths, for years. They know the program, and they know the refugees — and they know it’s safe and a good way to show the love of Christ.

Second, evangelical leaders, knowing the facts, are emboldened to speak when alternative facts may be holding sway elsewhere, particularly when those alternative facts are hurting the most vulnerable. In the Christian tradition, we call that speaking prophetically — like prophets in what Christians call the Old Testament, we have to sometimes speak to our own people and remind them of what is right.

Third, many evangelical leaders have had an uneasy connection with the Trump administration. Yes, they know that white evangelicals voted overwhelmingly for President Trump, and many strongly agree with Trump’s stated concerns about religious liberty, the Supreme Court, and more. But they want — and even need — room to disagree with a president who has said and done many things contrary to their beliefs. Speaking up for refugees is one of the areas where many believe they can.

The list of signees was not the usual names of progressive religious leaders, unknown to evangelicals. It was people like the highly respected Tim Keller, who hardly ever signs such letters, and Max Lucado and Ann Voskamp. All three are New York Times best-selling authors whose books are standard issue in many evangelical home libraries.

Simply put, evangelical leaders are trying to speak to the president and their people because they believe the facts, and their faith, call them to do so.

Being pro-life means caring about all of human life, and that includes being pro-refugee

Some have taken the position that we should not petition the government in this way, but rather should focus on the ministry in front of us instead of questioning the administration’s decision.

Yet in a post-Roe v. Wade world, when many of those in government have actively supported the legality and even the public funding of abortion, we have had no problem using both words and action. Christians have served women through crisis pregnancy centers, participating as foster families and caring for orphans. Yet we have also spoken prophetically and done everything we could to change the system at its foundation. We have called our leaders to make new laws and to overturn old ones. We found a place for both ministry and advocacy.

This situation is no different. Being pro-life means caring about all of human life, and that includes being pro-refugee. And we can use our hands to serve those already here that are hurting, while at the same time using our voices to plead with our leaders to continue this important work.

We are subject to governing authorities, yes. But in a free society that allows open discussion and even civil dissent, submission to laws as they stand does not mean we must stay silent. We can still speak for those who do not have a voice, whether they are in the womb or under tyranny. We can still plead for lives at every stage. And we know from experience that our voice and our influence make a difference.

We can’t just stick to the issues that appeal to the party base. We have to accept the challenge to speak prophetically and act rightly.

The response from evangelicals

The response from the letter has been encouraging, partly because of the unusual names on the list. For example, the flagship evangelical magazine Christianity Today reported on the story with tens of thousands of social media shares.

In conversations I’ve had, many are asking for more information—which was (and still is) the point. This is a place where more (accurate) information bolsters the case that we do not have to choose between our safety and the historic values of our country, let alone our faith.

World Relief recently planned a training in my own community. They expected a few dozen attendees, but almost 1,000 registered. They were forced to move to a larger venue, inside a conservative Evangelical Free Church a few blocks from my home, to accommodate those who wanted to help.

The work goes on despite the executive order

Even as we advocate, we intend to keep working while we wait.

For example, my friend Bryant Wright has led his congregation at Johnson Ferry Baptist Church in Marietta, Georgia, to develop a refugee resettlement ministry, highlighted on 60 Minutes. The future of such local church ministries is up in the air, but those who recently arrived are still adjusting to their surroundings and need the support of neighbors and new friends. Johnson Ferry Baptist Church and other churches like them will be there to meet those needs and show the love of Christ.

Room for disagreement

Americans can disagree on policy issues — that is one of the great things about our country. But for people of faith, this issue goes deeper than policy. Scripture calls us to welcome the stranger, but we cannot welcome them if they are not allowed to come in, and we would not advocate doing so in ways that are unsafe.

Evangelical Christians believe that government does have a role, and it’s essential that they perform that role well. One of the unspoken realities is that many evangelicals don’t trust the refugee process because President Obama oversaw it, and they don’t trust him. (I don’t think that is completely fair in regard to this program, but I do think it is how many feel.)

Perhaps they will have more confidence in President Trump’s vetting than in President Obama’s vetting, though my guess is the programs will be substantively similar since refugees are already vetted — extremely — and have been since 9/11.

Evangelicals respect our governing authorities. But just as with past presidents, respect for authority does not require agreeing with every single decision. And, just as in the past, there are times that call for speaking out. In this case, many evangelical leaders respectfully dissent with the suspension of the refugee resettlement program, and have pleaded with our leaders to reconsider.

Being the dissenting voice is never easy, but we are not called to do what is easy. We are called to do what is right.

There is a famous poem inscribed inside the pedestal of the Statue of Liberty, one that is familiar to many. Those words were part of a sonnet called “The New Colossus,” written by Emma Lazarus, and were inspired by her work with refugees.

“Give me your tired, your poor / Your huddled masses yearning to breathe free / The wretched refuse of your teeming shore. Send these, the homeless, tempest-tossed to me / I lift my lamp beside the golden door!”

Evangelical leaders are speaking to the president and their people, hoping that if that lamp should go out, it won’t be because the church stayed silent.

Ed Stetzer is a professor at Wheaton College in Illinois.

First Person is Vox’s home for compelling, provocative narrative essays. Do you have a story to share? Read our submission guidelines, and pitch us at firstperson@vox.com.