Save Money in this Sunday's paper

comments

Evangelicals and immigration reform

By Michael Gerson
The Washington Post

WASHINGTON In the immigration reform debate, evangelicals have become a political prize claimed by restrictionists and reformers alike. Both sides have a case to make.

Of the major American religious groups, white evangelicals are the most skeptical about immigration. According to a recent poll by the Pew Research Center’s Religion and Public Life Project, more than 60 percent believe that the growing number of immigrants “threatens traditional American customs and values” and more than half view immigrants as economic burdens rather than contributors. At the same time, many evangelical leaders and institutions – including the National Association of Evangelicals, and the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention – are high-profile advocates for comprehensive immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship.

It is often said that evangelicals are not monolithic on immigration. The reality is more troubling to the faithful, or should be. Their views on immigration are less a function of their religious beliefs than of their group identity. White evangelicals and Hispanic Christians, for example, differ greatly from one another on immigration, not because of different theologies but different social positions. On this issue, believers generally take their cues not from their catechism but from their cohort. Only about a quarter of all churchgoers report even hearing the issue of immigration in their place of worship (the figure is much higher for abortion or gay marriage).

Yet, as professor John Green of the University of Akron pointed out at a recent Faith Angle Forum conference, the polling offers two sources of encouragement for advocates of comprehensive immigration reform.

First, even in the religious group most skeptical of reform – white evangelicals – more than 60 percent believe undocumented workers should be allowed to stay in the country “with conditions.” Green cites this as evidence the country has learned from the immigration debate, in which mass deportation is widely dismissed as impractical. The content of these “conditions,” however, is up for debate. The requirement to learn English is popular with all religious groups. Evangelicals generally endorse a “secure-the-border-first” approach, while Catholic and mainline Christians are divided about the phasing of reform. Strong evangelical support for a 10-year waiting period before citizenship is decidedly not shared by Hispanic Christians.

In general, evangelicals seem open to a legal status for undocumented workers, when accompanied by strong affirmations of order, assimilation and legality. Probably not that different from many other Americans.

Second, Green points out an interesting distinction between cultural issues among white evangelicals. Those who attend worship services more frequently are more likely to oppose same-sex marriage – tending toward the traditionally conservative position. But immigration provides a contrast. Those who attend worship services more frequently are less likely to see newcomers as a threat to American values.

Why, on this particular cultural issue, does religious intensity pull some people away from their predominant group identity?

It could be that religious congregations are growing more diverse. Perhaps 15 percent of American Latinos consider themselves to be evangelicals. Many evangelical denominations are engaged in serious Hispanic outreach. And many smaller churches are being reinvigorated by immigrant participation.

The greater openness of regular attenders toward immigrants could also be the result of teaching from the pulpit or in the Sunday school class. While, as I noted, such messages are relatively rare, they are not unknown. And they are not new. Leaders such as Richard Land and Ralph Reed have encouraged immigration reform since the 1990s.

And Christian theology does have a current in favor of compassion and hospitality. This does not dictate the details of immigration policy, but it necessarily entails a conception of illegal immigrants as persons, and a resistance to the division of their families.

On the polling evidence, politicians might lead evangelicals in either direction on immigration reform. But for evangelicals themselves, it would be a discrediting shame if their group identity counted more than their deepest beliefs.

Email: michaelgerson@washpost.com.
Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

The Charlotte Observer welcomes your comments on news of the day. The more voices engaged in conversation, the better for us all, but do keep it civil. Please refrain from profanity, obscenity, spam, name-calling or attacking others for their views.

Have a news tip? You can send it to a local news editor; email local@charlotteobserver.com to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Charlotte Observer.

  Read more



Hide Comments

This affects comments on all stories.

Cancel OK

The Charlotte Observer welcomes your comments on news of the day. The more voices engaged in conversation, the better for us all, but do keep it civil. Please refrain from profanity, obscenity, spam, name-calling or attacking others for their views.

Have a news tip? You can send it to a local news editor; email local@charlotteobserver.com to send us your tip - or - consider joining the Public Insight Network and become a source for The Charlotte Observer.

  Read more


Quick Job Search
Salary Databases
Your 2 Cents
Share your opinion with our Partners
Learn More
CharlotteObserver.com