One must ponder how Christians who support the current U.S. administration’s stance on immigration reconcile this position with the teachings found in Leviticus 19:34, which states (in the King James version):
But the stranger that dwelleth with you shall be unto you as one born among you, and thou shalt love him as thyself; for ye were strangers in the land of Egypt.
Do they dismiss the Bible as mere epic poetry? Or might they be labeled CINOs—Christians In Name Only?
Among the many traits that made the Catholic Church, the only Christian denomination for a millennium and a half, stand out was its universalism—what we might now term globalism. This characteristic, alongside its spiritual message, provided countless impoverished and marginalized individuals—who constitute the majority of the global populace—the means to transcend their circumstances, much like culture itself serves as a vehicle for exploration beyond one’s immediate surroundings.
America’s historical narrative is rich with examples of its welcoming nature. Consider Hector Saint John de Crèvecoeur, a French immigrant who arrived in colonial America in the early 1760s. In the chapter “What Is An American” from his notable work Letters from an American Farmer (1782), he eloquently proclaimed:
We know, properly speaking, no strangers; this is every person’s country.
Despite my affinity for the ideals of universalism, I find common ground with Friedrich Hayek and James Buchanan regarding the limitations of unrestricted immigration: it may, at some point, threaten the fabric of a free society. My post from June 19, 2018, titled “Immigration: A Confession and a Value Judgment,” outlines the bones of this argument.
This skepticism towards unregulated immigration is further explored in the work of Alex Nowrasteh and Benjamin Powell, who present what they term “the new economic case against immigration” in their 2021 book Wretched Refuse?. They argue that this perspective lacks empirical support. The notion that an immigrant entering the American workforce imposes a net burden on “society” is fundamentally flawed; if this reasoning were sound, we’d also have to critique a woman or a student stepping into the job market.
Ultimately, the treatment of immigrants in recent times has devolved into a tribal, irrational, and decidedly “un-American” approach—if we can even delineate what “un-American” means in opposition to the ideal of a free society. The current practices surrounding immigration appear increasingly barbaric and contrary to the rule of law. A society that claims to uphold freedom and dignity cannot function without a foundation of human decency.
******************************
Hector Saint John de Crèvecoeur on his farm, as viewed by DALL-E
