Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
BT Irwin (00:04):
Family and friends,
neighbors and, most of all,
strangers.
Welcome to the ChristianChronicle Podcast.
We're bringing you the storiesshaping Church of Christ
congregations and members aroundthe world.
I'm BT Irwin.
May what you are about to hearbless you and honor God.
How should Church of Christcongregations in the United
(00:25):
States love their members andneighbors who are not US
citizens, maybe even those whosestatus in the United States is
not certain or may not be legal?
This is not a new question, buta new administration in the
nation's capital and the buzz inthe news, and maybe the pews,
makes the question seem moreurgent these days To some Church
(00:48):
of Christ congregations andmembers here in the United
States.
The stakes are high.
They are contemplating the realpossibility that their members
or neighbors could be placedunder arrest and deported.
They are contemplating the realpossibility that they may have
to choose between the care andhospitality they give to their
own members and neighbors, orstanding aside for or even
(01:11):
supporting law enforcement, andthe arrest of those same members
and neighbors.
I reckon that, for leaders ofthose congregations, they never
imagined that choosing betweenobedience to the law of the
Christ and the law of the landcould turn out this way.
You may think I'm beingdramatic, but listen to this.
A couple of months ago we triedto make an episode about Church
(01:32):
of Christ congregations thatminister to migrant communities.
We planned to ask leaders ofthose congregations to talk
about how they were adjusting toand preparing for the threat of
more aggressive and invasivelaw enforcement activity around
and maybe in their congregationsand their neighborhoods.
We asked leaders from severalcongregations to be on the show.
(01:55):
All but three declined for fearthat being on this program
would make an unsafe situationfor their members and neighbors.
On the day we were going torecord the three leaders who
agreed to be on the show, onebacked out that morning and when
I contacted the remaining two,one of them said he also planned
to back out Once again.
These leaders expressed concernthat being on this show and
(02:18):
talking about this subject woulddraw the wrong kind of
attention to their congregations.
Out of 125 episodes of theChristian Chronicle podcast so
far, that was the first timethat congregational leaders ever
said no in the first place andthen backed out for fear of
putting their congregations insome kind of danger.
We're not talking about theircongregations getting written up
(02:40):
in a quote-unquote brotherhoodpublication, as my dad used to
say.
We're talking about theirconcern that their congregations
could become targets of federallaw enforcement.
Let that sink in Now.
If you follow the ChristianChronicle, you know that our
archives are full of storiesabout Church of Christ
congregations in the UnitedStates that minister to migrants
and refugees.
(03:01):
In many cases those stories areabout how foreigners become
family, many of them submittingto baptism and joining the
church.
As much as we report onChristians from the United
States going into all the world,we report almost as much on all
the world coming to Christiansin the United States.
The borderless kingdom of Godis very much on full display in
(03:23):
the Christian Chronicle.
So when the President of theUnited States promises to use
any means to deport 15 to 20million people in the next four
years, it's not a politicalstory, it's a church story, and
many Church of Christcongregations, including many
that we covered over the years,may feel like they are in the
path of a coming storm.
What will they do if they haveto choose between their own
(03:46):
brothers and sisters andneighbors and their own
government?
We made this episode withChurch of Christ congregations
in mind.
For those congregations thatminister to and with immigrants
in their communities.
We want this episode to be asource of biblical perspective
and good information to helpwork through the decisions that
may have to be made.
This is not an episode aboutfederal policy.
(04:08):
It is an episode about thequote-unquote policies of local
congregations as their leadersdiscern how to respond to
changing circumstances aroundand maybe in their congregations
.
First, you'll hear from a Texasimmigration attorney.
He'll talk about whatcongregations need to know about
the law now.
Next, you'll hear from a Texasimmigration attorney.
He'll talk about whatcongregations need to know about
the law now.
Next, you'll hear from a formerofficial at US Immigration and
(04:30):
Customs Enforcement, or ICE forshort.
He'll talk about how ICE makesdecisions about how and when to
approach churches, either toarrest suspected illegals on or
near church premises or toenlist the help of a church in
investigating and detainingsuspects.
And last, you'll hear from aBible professor and
(04:51):
congregational minister.
He'll talk about howcongregations can think and act
biblically in the tensionbetween what the Christ commands
and what the government demands.
Our first guest is Esau Verdine, the founder and managing
attorney of Verdine Law inDallas, texas.
He's practiced immigration lawfor more than 25 years.
Longtime Christian Chroniclereaders will recognize him from
(05:12):
some stories we did in the paston Church of Christ Ministries
among migrants in the UnitedStates.
Esau, thank you for making timeto talk to us today.
Isaul Verdin (05:20):
It's great to be
here.
Thank you for inviting me.
BT Irwin (05:22):
Yes, sir.
So I guess we need to startwith this.
How has your job changed sinceJanuary 20, 2025?
Isaul Verdin (05:30):
Wow, lots of
changes since President Trump's
inauguration.
Certainly the phones from apractical perspective, the
phones have been very busy witha lot of questions.
The phones have been very busywith a lot of questions, but the
(05:59):
general mood and the consensusthat I'm perceiving from the
clientele and from people thatare inquiring with me is just.
I'm sensing a lot ofapprehension, but, first and
foremost, a Christianimmigration lawyer, it's an
opportunity for me to look atthose encounters and point
people in the right direction.
So it's I've seen it as a greatopportunity to discuss all
(06:20):
things Jesus and it's been quiteremarkable from that
perspective.
But I would say people arenervous, people are anxious and
they're concerned about what thenew laws mean for them.
I really do believe that thereis a lot more fear and concern
(06:40):
about something that is notlikely to happen.
I really, I truly believe thatthe rumors are heightened right
now and our country has a strongtradition of respecting the
freedom of religion and notinfringing upon the free
(07:01):
exercise of that religion.
So historically active criminalfederal prosecution for what
happens within the premises of achurch building has not been
the story of American history.
So there are rare exampleshistorically where things like
(07:22):
that have happened rare exampleshistorically where things like
that have happened, but usuallyit has to do with malfeasance by
an individual and sometimes taxissues you know, tax filings
and investigations on badconduct for individuals.
But this new reality of peoplebeing concerned about having
(07:42):
members that don't have therequisite immigration status.
Yes, there have beenannouncements that the shield is
off, that the church premise isa fair game, but the government
still has to abide by the rightprocedures.
(08:03):
They have to serve warrants.
So I think maybe perhaps aneducation of what that warrant
process looks like, just sochurch leadership can be aware
of, in the rare event thatsomething like that does happen,
that they know how to handlethat situation with calm.
But I'd like to remind all ofmy, the people that inquire with
(08:28):
me, especially fellow believers, that you know our first and
foremost duty is to God and tolove, love our neighbors and
love our other church members,and we are practicing our faith
by loving them and I think thatis the ultimate defense.
And I like to state, you knowthere's a very rare probability
(08:51):
that there's going to be thiskind of enforcement within the
church premises a very smallpercentage.
But there's a 100% degree ofcertainty that they're going to
stand before the Lord one dayand give account for the way
they conducted themselvestowards their neighbors.
So let's keep the rightperspective, let's keep things
balanced and act accordingly.
(09:12):
But again, if in the rare event, law enforcement does appear at
the church buildings, I thinkit's good to know that they have
to have a warrant before theystart going through the church.
It can only go on the publicareas in the church building.
It can't go in any privateadministrative offices.
If they do want to go intothose private areas within the
(09:32):
church building, you have tohave a search warrant that says
that they have that scope ofgoing into those private areas
and it has to be signed by acourt.
The dates have to be specific.
So I would encourage people toread that document.
Um, make sure it's signed, makesure things.
If there's objection to wherethey're, they're intruding upon
(09:53):
an area that's not specified inthat document, annotate that
objection, cooperate with lawenforcement, annotate that
objection and then talk to yourattorney and things will be
dealt with in court.
But it should be cooperation inthat extent.
But there is no duty to bereporting people.
Fellow members, it's just notcommon practice.
(10:14):
Everywhere I've worshipped Ihaven't seen that it's a common
practice, an ordinary practice,to be inquiring about individual
church members' immigrationdocuments.
That's just unheard of.
I have not seen that before, soI don't think that the law
requires churches to begin to dothat.
BT Irwin (10:33):
It's interesting
because I'm 49 years old and
I've been a civics nerd my wholelife and there's been a lot of
sensational news lately, and soI started doing my own research
and none of this is actuallyvery new.
So if we go even back to the1980s, there was this.
This was an issue in the 1980s.
My question is has the lawchanged or is the law the same
(10:56):
as it, as it has been all along?
Isaul Verdin (10:59):
The law has been
more or less the same.
I would say the substance oflaw remains the same.
There are a few additional, Iwould say from a policy
perspective, allowing lawenforcement to have slightly
more flexibility in where theycan enforce the laws has
(11:19):
expanded a little bit, but againthere's still discretion.
Little bit, but again there'sstill discretion.
There's the power for agovernment to have discretion
and respecting tradition andrespecting the Constitution,
there's still those powers thathave to be considered and
weighed as they enforce justice.
(11:40):
It's a good idea to touch uponsome of the laws that kind of go
into this sphere and I thinkthe most common that would be
relevant to church audienceswould be that there are existing
laws that prohibit US citizensand legal permanent residents in
the US to obviously to can'tsmuggle people in illegally into
(12:04):
the US, which is common sense,right.
You can't transport, which is alittle bit less common sense
but still logically sound.
We can understand.
We shouldn't be moving peoplearound that we know are
undocumented aliens.
The other one that I think isprobably in the grayer area is
this notion of harboring.
(12:24):
The other one that I think isprobably in the grayer area is
this notion of harboring, whichis a little bit in a grayer area
, but there are federal criminalstatutes that prohibit
harboring.
What this means is facilitatingshelter finances.
Even there have been old caseswhere the assistance of food to
(12:45):
somebody that there's knowledge,that is, does not have the
requisite immigration documentsAgain, to be found guilty and
convicted.
The government first would haveto be very motivated to
prosecute first and second theywould have to establish that
there's no knowledge, actualknowledge, and there's also this
(13:10):
idea or concept of recklessdisregard.
So the government can provethat there's reckless disregard,
that perhaps they can find aconviction against somebody
who's harboring or assisting,concealing an alien, an alien
Again, if in the ordinary commonday practice of being a church
organization, a church groupthat is exercising their faith,
(13:39):
of fellowshipping with membersand engaging each other for
faith-based reasons, and there'sno actual knowledge and there's
no reason to be asking that,then they're not being reckless
because there's no necessaryreason to be inquiring about
those things and they would befound not guilty under the law
(14:00):
in that situation.
That's why I really think thepossibilities and the
probabilities of the numbers ofactually the people having that
concern are so low that itshouldn't disrupt our way of
practicing our faith.
BT Irwin (14:14):
So I'm thinking of a
particular congregation that
we've reported on at theChristian Chronicle and I've
been to this congregation.
They have they give away foodand clothing and they give away
a lot of food and clothing.
Anybody who needs food andclothing.
They can come and they can getwhat they need from this
congregation.
It's an amazing ministry, butthe leader of the ministry, when
(14:34):
I visited, shared with me a lotof the people who come to us
for food and clothing aremigrants.
They are, and many of them arevery recent.
He said we don't ask where theycome from, why they're here,
whether they're here legally.
We just, when people come to usand they need food and they
need clothing, we give it tothem because that's what we
(14:54):
believe Jesus commands us to do.
Is that, would you say that's acase of being reckless?
Does that fall under?
Because they're not asking?
Right?
They're like we don't want toknow.
But could the government make acase that?
Well, you should know, it'syour responsibility to know, and
if you're not, if you're notfinding out, then you're
(15:16):
harboring this flow of people.
Isaul Verdin (15:19):
So the question
would be is it reckless?
I think that's a legitimatequestion to ask.
The question would be is itreckless?
I think that's a legitimatequestion to ask.
It's.
It's definitely in a gray area.
I think the church could, ingood faith, put a case forward
that they are they're in thebusiness of providing food and
(15:56):
clothing to individuals in need.
That in their ordinary practiceof conducting those that mission
that they are, but it's nottypical for that.
But there's no discriminationon who receives that.
In addition, they're notexperts, nor do they have
perhaps the manpower, the legalexpertise to be interpreting
documents of whether somebody islegal, because we can't
discriminate on what somebodylooks like or how somebody
(16:18):
speaks because they may or maynot have a legal document to be
in the US.
Some individuals speak noEnglish, yet they have an
authorization to work in thefarms and pick our fruit and
food that we eat, that we buy inthe grocery store, because they
have a legal document to dothat, and yet they might not
have enough money so they mightseek some resources from a local
(16:40):
church group.
So again, I think that thatchurch mission has grounds to
defend itself and I find ithighly unlikely that the
government will prosecute thatAgain.
If they do, you know, therecould be some defenses that are
valid in that case.
BT Irwin (16:59):
Continuing with the
example of this congregation,
could law enforcement conduct anundercover operation there?
So when this church is in, youknow, when they open up their
pantry and their clothing closetand people are coming through
to receive what they need, canlaw enforcement come through
(17:19):
undercover and observe what'sgoing on there and who's coming
and who's conducting the program?
Is that anything that acongregation would need to worry
about?
Isaul Verdin (17:28):
That's a good
question.
I don't know if the governmentis actively conducting those
kinds of operations at themoment.
Certainly they have someresources to conduct undercover
operations and I don't know ifthey've contemplated that,
whether they've started doingthat, but I think it's within
the government's purview to beable to do something like that
(17:53):
if they wanted to gatherinformation.
I think it's possible.
BT Irwin (17:59):
And do they have to
ask permission, or can they just
do it?
Isaul Verdin (18:02):
That's a good
question.
I think that perhaps a because,as you know, I'm an immigration
lawyer, that's what I practicethere are in a case where they
wanted to prosecute criminally,there are lawyers that would are
experts in federal criminaldefense work and I think a
lawyer like that would be morecapable of knowing the
distinctions of the nuances asto the legitimate authority that
(18:26):
an investigative undercoverofficer would have, and perhaps
there are defenses to be made interms of the degree of
intrusion on those grounds.
But I'm not an expert in thatkind of situation.
BT Irwin (18:43):
Frankly, so is there
anything else that folks in our
Church of Christ audience reallyneed to know about this subject
today?
Isaul Verdin (18:50):
I think that
church leaders should get
informed.
It doesn't hurt to have aconsultation with a local
immigration lawyer, maybe with afederal criminal defense lawyer
, and just have that resourceavailable.
In the low likelihood thatsomething does happen, you have
a resource to attend to.
(19:10):
But other than that, continuein business as usual.
The laws are more or less thesame as they have always been.
Follow a reasonablenessstandard.
You can't be smuggling,transporting, concealing, hiding
foreign nationals that are hereillegally.
You can't employ foreignnationals that are not
(19:33):
authorized, but you cancertainly continue to worship
with your brothers and sistersno matter what documents they
have.
BT Irwin (19:42):
Esau Verdine is
founder and managing attorney of
Verdine Law in Dallas, Texas.
Esau, thank you for helping usunderstand immigration law a lot
better today.
Isaul Verdin (19:50):
My pleasure.
Thank you, BT.
BT Irwin (19:57):
Our next guest is Paul
Hunker, a partner with DeMott
McChesney, kurt Wright andArmendariz, an immigration law
practice in Dallas, texas.
Before joining the firm lastyear, paul was the chief counsel
for the US Immigration andCustoms Enforcement Office in
Dallas.
Overall, he spent 32 years asan attorney with the Department
of Homeland Security and ICE.
(20:18):
He's here to tell us whatchurches and ministries need to
know about immigration lawenforcement.
Now, paul, thank you for beingon the show.
Thanks, pt.
Could you just tell us aboutyour background, tell us about
your career, what you've beendoing and how you got to the
point that you're doing what youdo now?
Paul Hunker (20:42):
and what is that?
I graduated from law school in92, and I went to work for the
Immigration and NaturalizationService in Dallas.
I had different jobs with them.
In 2003, we became theDepartment of Homeland Security
and I became the Chief Counselof US Immigration Customs
Enforcement in Dallas ICE.
Ice is the sub-agency of theDepartment of Justice, so I was
Chief Counsel for ICE for abouta little more than 20 years in
(21:03):
Dallas and then I retired fromthe federal government in
January 2024.
BT Irwin (21:10):
And I've been in
private practice since then,
what kind of private practiceare you in now?
Tell us what you're doing now.
Paul Hunker (21:16):
So we represent
people in all matters of
immigration and nationality lawhelping people get their green
cards, helping people naturalize.
Removal defense when someone'sin removal proceedings and the
government's trying to removethem.
Defending them in thoseproceedings.
Applying for benefits inimmigration proceedings, federal
court matters, challengingimmigration action in federal
(21:41):
courts, business immigration Ourfirm, our firm does it all.
BT Irwin (21:45):
And how is that
different from what you were
doing at Immigration and CustomsEnforcement?
So you were chief counsel inDallas For people that are
listening who aren't sure whatthat job entails.
What did you do?
Paul Hunker (21:57):
Basically the ICE
attorneys are like the
immigration district attorneys,so when a part of Department of
Homeland Security wants toremove someone from the United
States, we are the attorneys incourt that represent the
government in those proceedings.
So I would supervise ourattorneys.
I would also sort of the chieflegal officer for the special
(22:21):
agent in charge in Dallas forHomeland Security Investigations
.
They investigate immigrationand customs crimes.
And then I was the attorney forthe field office director,
who's sort of the headimmigration cop in North Texas,
sort of giving her advice aboutlegal questions regarding
(22:42):
immigration arrest authoritydetention authority and things
like that.
BT Irwin (22:50):
So is it kind of like
you've gone from being on the
prosecution to now you're kindof doing defense?
Paul Hunker (22:53):
That's exactly
right.
Lawyers are good at switchingsides.
That's what I did.
BT Irwin (22:57):
Okay, so the occasion
for this episode is that we
invited several leaders ofChurch of Christ congregations
to be on the show to talk abouthow the change in what I'll call
the mood— about immigrationenforcement in the United States
is a matter of concern for them, either because they have many
members in their congregationswho may be affected by it, or
(23:22):
because they have communityministries that serve migrant
populations.
All but one of the ministers weinvited to talk about this
either declined or backed out atthe last minute because they
were afraid of drawing theattention of law enforcement to
their congregations and theirneighbors.
Do they have a good reason tobe afraid or concerned right now
(23:44):
?
Paul Hunker (23:45):
Probably not.
Ice changed their policy underthe Trump administration.
They used to have a policywhere they wouldn't go into
churches unless they gotapproval from a very high up
person, and so they eliminatedthat.
But I don't expect ice to bedoing a lot of operations at
churches.
You know, I don't expect uh,you know I'm catholic.
(24:07):
I don't expect ice to show upat the nine o'clock mass and
start asking asking for people'spapers.
I think if they do somethingrelated to a church, it's
probably because they have sometargeted person that they're
going after.
But, even then, I think it'sdoubtful they're going to do
very much of this.
(24:28):
I think there may be this orthat incident in the media and
the media will cover that andthat'll cause people to have, I
think, undue fear that theirchurch is going to be targeted.
But you know, I have a lot ofrespect for the ICE officers and
the ICE leadership and you knowthey're being.
You know they're marchingorders from the Trump
administration or be moreaggressive and remove more
(24:48):
people.
But I think it's going to be arare situation where ICE
officers are like going into achurch.
BT Irwin (25:02):
So how does
Immigration and Customs
Enforcement decide whether asituation is cause for entering
a church or a ministry or tryingto work with a church or
ministry to arrest orinvestigate someone?
Paul Hunker (25:09):
Maybe you could
analogize schools Often, if the
police have a warrant for astudent, they may go to the
principal.
The principal will call thestudent in and then they may
arrest the person.
There may be cooperation.
Now I think schools areconcerned and churches are
concerned with this greatlyexpanded scope of ICE arrests.
(25:33):
That ICE may be not just notgoing after, like, people that
have a serious crime or adangerous, but just being here
illegally.
And so I think schools andchurches are like well,
generally I would cooperate withICE, but like, do I wanna
cooperate if they're just gonnago arrest people simply because
they're here illegally?
And look, people have to becareful that they don't impede
(25:56):
law enforcement.
That could be a crime.
But people also need tounderstand their rights and we
live in a country where thepolice have limited authority
and, regarding a church,generally you know, law
enforcement can enter publicplaces.
So if anyone can come into achurch, come into an area, law
enforcement can come in, theydon.
Anyone can come into a church,come into an area law
enforcement can come in.
(26:17):
They don't need.
They don't need a warrant to dothat.
If they in plain sight seesomeone that they probably cause
to arrest, they can arrest thatperson.
The church could would be ableto ask them to leave if they're
even if they're in a public area.
What gives them a right to gointo the church is that they
have a search warrant for ajudge that says, hey, there's
(26:41):
probable cause that there'scriminal activity here or
there's records or or peoplethat are here illegally, and
they have a warrant thatspecifically allows them to go
into a church.
BT Irwin (26:51):
I'm thinking of a
particular church right now
where they feed and clothehundreds of people every month
and folks are constantly.
They come every week to getwhat they need and I was there
with one of the leaders of theprogram and he said a lot of
these folks are immigrants.
They have recently arrived inthe United States.
Many of them don't speak thelanguage.
(27:11):
He said we don't know how theygot here, why they're here,
whether they're supposed to behere or not.
He said we don't ask questions,we just we feed everyone who
comes to us and needs food.
We, you know, if people needclothing, we give them clothing
and that's what we believe theLord has has required of us as
(27:33):
disciples of Jesus Christ.
The Lord has required of us asdisciples of Jesus Christ.
So in a situation like that, Imean, is a church like that
exposing itself in any waylegally, because they have all
these people on their premiseson a regular basis?
They're not asking for personalinformation or documentation of
immigration status?
Is that a situation where lawenforcement might say, hey,
(27:55):
we're pretty sure there's somepeople to round up there and
what might the church need to do?
Because they want to belaw-abiding, obviously, but they
also want to obey the law ofChrist, and so there's a tension
there for the leaders of thatcongregation In that situation
generally, what you said.
Paul Hunker (28:13):
they should be okay
.
We give some advice toreligious nonprofits about
matters like this, for example.
It's a good practice that theyhave these neutral criteria.
They're helping everyone.
They're not asking aboutimmigration matters.
Now, of course, in terms ofemployees, if they're employees
of the company, they need todocument that the people are
(28:33):
here, so that sort of thing isnot going to be considering
harboring a non-citizen.
If a church sort of generallyhelps people in need, what they
have to be careful is like whenICE shows up, that they can't
like, oh, go out the back dooror do this or do that, because
(28:53):
that could be consideredshielding from detection.
BT Irwin (28:56):
And then one concern
that a congregation shared with
me when we were talking aboutdoing this episode is that,
because they serve so manypeople who are in need of help
again just we're talking aboutfood, clothing, sometimes
medicine their concern is that,well, if law enforcement finds
(29:16):
out about our church on thisprogram, the one we're recording
right now, might they set upcamp across the street from our
church building or set up in theparking lot or asked to come in
and see who we're serving, andthat would expose our neighbors.
It could put them in an unsafeposition, or maybe people won't
come to us for help anymorebecause they see such a strong
(29:40):
law enforcement presence at ourchurch.
Is that anything to beconcerned about?
Paul Hunker (29:46):
I don't believe so.
I've not seen that.
I've never seen that.
I haven't seen that in theTrump administration so far.
We do expect a greaterexpansion of law enforcement,
but I doubt that ICE is going tobe doing things like that.
I mean there's I mean, lookunder the Biden administration,
you know, millions of peoplewere let into the country and I
(30:09):
believe that ICE is going to befocused on people who they think
they can remove quickly, and Idon't believe that they're going
to be sort of setting up kindof mobile centers outside of
areas where they think there'sjust especially, certainly, I
think, a church related activityor church related program.
(30:32):
I don't believe they're goingto be doing that sort of thing.
BT Irwin (30:42):
So do you have any
final words of advice to
congregational leaders andministry leaders who are
listening, especially the onesthat are doing so much work in
migrant communities, or many oftheir members are immigrants
themselves.
Do you have any final advice orresources that you want to
share with them?
Paul Hunker (30:54):
Well, we're happy
to help, just sort of walk them
through.
It's good that they have.
Maybe they have a plan ShouldICE show up, what do you do?
People can panic and it's goodto give people some comfort
about okay, here's what happensIf ICE shows up.
The person at the front desksays, well, let me get the
(31:15):
supervisor, Let me have you talkto the person who's in charge
and just sort of give people alittle comfort of what could
happen if ICE shows up.
BT Irwin (31:28):
Somebody told me
recently every congregation
ought to consult an immigrationattorney.
Is that something you recommend, or do you think that's going a
little too far?
Paul Hunker (31:38):
Almost every
congregation employs people so
they want to make sure thatthey're doing their immigration
paperwork correctly, and weexpect to see a greater
expansion of ICE going out thereand checking immigration
paperwork of entities and thenadvising the entity, making sure
they understand their rights.
You know, if an ICE agent showsup, you don't have to let them
(31:59):
in.
If the well, they can come intoa public area, but if you want
them to leave, you can tell themto leave.
They can only really they canonly stay there if they have a
search warrant.
What to do if they have asearch warrant?
What do you do in thatsituation?
So I think we can be helpfulfor congregations or an
immigration lawyer can behelpful in these matters.
BT Irwin (32:20):
Paul Hunger.
You have been very helpful tous today.
Thank you for taking time outof your schedule to be on our
show.
Paul Hunker (32:26):
My pleasure, my
pleasure.
BT Irwin (32:27):
All right, god bless.
Paul Hunker (32:28):
Yeah, you too, bye.
BT Irwin (32:35):
For our final segment,
we welcome the Christian
Chronicles' own opinions editor,Dr Jeremy Beller.
Dr Beller is Dean of theCollege of Bible at Oklahoma
Christian University andminister with the Wilshire
Church of Christ in OklahomaCity, Oklahoma.
He's here to help us find somerelief in the tension between
obedience to God and obedienceto government.
Dr Beller, is your inbox readyfor this?
Dr. Jeremie Beller (32:59):
I've cleared
it out just for this episode
All right?
BT Irwin (33:02):
Well, let's start with
the Bible, which is actually
the source of tension that a lotof church folks may feel on the
topic we're covering today.
On one hand, we know what Jesussays about the least of these
in the Gospel of Matthew,chapter 25, verses 31 to 46.
He makes caring for the needsof homeless, incarcerated, poor,
(33:23):
sick people a matter of eternallife or death.
Those who want to inherit thekingdom of God will help those
who need help.
Does Jesus mean only those withdocumentation, or does he mean
anyone and everyone we meet attheir point of need?
But then we have the ApostlePaul's letter to the Church of
Christ in Rome in chapter 13,verse 1.
He says that we are to submitto the government because the
(33:45):
government is established by God.
This sets up a kind of bind forcongregations that minister in
communities where some folks arenot in the United States by
legal means.
How do those congregations obeyboth the Gospel of Matthew,
chapter 25, verses 31 to 46, andRomans, chapter 13, verse 1?
Dr. Jeremie Beller (34:06):
On the most
fundamental level, though, I
think people of faith have toacknowledge that no government
has the power to remove theimage of God stamped on anyone.
So governments are required toprotect citizens according to
Romans 13, punish evildoers even, but that does not give
governments the power to removethe God image that is placed on
(34:29):
everyone through creation, and Ibelieve that the legal
tradition of the US tries tocapture this in some healthy
ways, which is the entireconcept of due process.
Due process is to be sure thatthe humanity of the individual
is treated justly, that youcannot just take someone and
(34:52):
whisk them away or deny themsome sort of comfort and
protection simply becausesomeone says so, that our legal
tradition gives us that hope, orthat backstop Governments have
a responsibility to establishfair and humane laws.
I think that's at the heart ofwhat Romans 13 is saying, and it
(35:15):
all goes.
We often remind people thatRomans 13 was not written to a
democratically elected officialor to people living in a
representative republic, and soit raises even the tension, but
governments do not have thepower to strip human dignity and
the image of God for everyone.
(35:36):
So even the process of enforcingthe law, the image of God, must
be respected, and so the churchneeds to work towards the human
dignity, and as far as we cando that while honoring our legal
(35:57):
customs, I think we are calledto do that.
But if we are called to decide,do I show humanity and do I
minister to the person or do Inot because of this law?
I think the Christianconviction is we're going to
stand with Jesus in this debate.
Conviction is we're going tostand with Jesus in this debate
(36:17):
and some laws are not fair andsome laws aren't just, and we
will not participate in theenforcement of ungodly laws.
BT Irwin (36:24):
At the very beginning
of your answer, I actually my
imagination took me to an adultBible class at church, everybody
sitting in the room andlistening to you talk.
Adult Bible class at church,everybody sitting in the room
and listening to you talk.
I can hear somebody in thatadult Bible class listening to
you and then responding yeah, itdoesn't really matter why
they're here or how they gothere.
They're still breaking the law.
(36:44):
So, dr Beller, are you askingus to decide if some people are
more guilty than others?
Dr. Jeremie Beller (36:51):
A child
who's been brought here.
The dreamer situation is reallyfrustrating because there is a
human element to that that oftengets overlooked.
So people who use thissometimes vitriolic language of
they need to go back to theirhome country.
Well, for most children, thisis their home country, that's
(37:11):
right.
They were brought here.
Some of them don't even knowthe language from where they
came.
They have no support for wherethey're going back.
And all this to what end?
And that's where I think thehumanity of this comes into play
.
Yeah, so let's round up a bunchof round up, a bunch of college
(37:39):
age students who were broughthere as infants and send them
back to wherever they came from.
Now, what are they left with?
And if the response is that'snot my problem, then we have a
problem, because the argument ofthe New Testament is it is our
problem.
We minister to souls, notpassports and this image.
This is where the humanity ofthis comes in.
(38:01):
And so I think, as Americancitizens, when we are placed in
a situation to give voice andsupport to how laws are made and
who is making those laws, Ithink this is where it becomes
critical that we exercise thatvoice, and when we see a legal
statute or we listen to a debatein Congress.
(38:22):
Christians should exercisetheir voice and say no, this.
We have to show humanity tothese situations and I even
think that the asylum seekerswe'll mention.
A little bit maybe about howScripture even frames the idea
of alien and sojourner, but youknow, people who are seeking
(38:46):
safety from an oppressive regimeand fleeing for safety.
Isn't that the heart of thegospel?
To provide peace and comfort?
Isn't that the heart of thegospel, to provide peace and
comfort?
Um, and, yes, there should bean orderly process, but the fact
that our process is so brokenand not being addressed is a
moral issue in and of itself andunfortunately, as we've seen
(39:10):
time and time again, it's lostin a political power debate, so
that a bill is proposed butwhile it has the support of the
majority of people, if someonewants it to be an election issue
, we will oppose that bill, eventhough both sides of the party
agree that this is the humaneand moves us forward.
(39:31):
Well, we're sacrificing what'sright for what gets me power,
and I think that's whereChristians have to be adamant
that the humanity and fairtreatment of people has to come
above and beyond politicalprocess.
So, people who are afraid tovote on a bill or to suggest
(39:55):
legislation, because what willthat do to our power base?
Well, what power we're given isto be used for the just and
fair treatment of people, and Ithink I believe governments have
every right to establish lawsfor the protection of people.
Borders and boundaries in ourmodern setting are a concern of
(40:19):
modern governments.
It's not the concern of thekingdom of God, which is
comprised of every nation, tribeand tongue, and that's where I
think it questions who are weloyal to?
Above all else, that thekingdom of God is not defined by
boundaries and borders.
Now, earthly governments are,and God, I think Romans 13 is
(40:42):
building a framework, butcompassion does not.
It does not require a passport.
BT Irwin (40:49):
Let's say we're a
congregation and there are
members of our congregation thatare not from the United States
and we may not know exactly howthey got here.
Or we are doing a lot of workamong migrant communities, both
at our facility and offsite, andlaw enforcement comes around
(41:11):
and says hey, we want, we wantto set up shop in your parking
lot, or we want to come intoyour clothing giveaway and see
who's taking clothes and foodhere, or we want to.
You know, we want to come intoyour facility and see who's here
.
Do we have biblical grounds torefuse that request from law
(41:34):
enforcement?
Dr. Jeremie Beller (41:35):
Our default
setting as Christians should be
yes, we support and we followcivil laws.
That should be our defaultsetting, and I think, as you
read 1 Peter, one of thequestions that Peter was helping
the Christians struggle with ishow do you serve as a Christian
(41:56):
in an environment that isnon-Christian?
And he will say love thebrotherhood, honor the king.
He'll constantly remind themlive in such a way that, when
people see what you're doing,they'll glorify God.
But Peter also has kind of.
This underlying theme is don'tdo things to stand out and make
(42:19):
yourself a target.
However, there are times Peterwould say if any man suffers as
a Christian, don't let him beashamed.
There are times when thatChristianity in and of itself is
going to put a target on you.
But Peter says don't put atarget on yourself unduly.
If any man suffers, let it befor doing what's right and not
(42:42):
wrong.
So our default setting shouldalways be of course we support
and we work alongside of ourcivil authorities, but again
where we started, when thattrumps our basic treatment of
the humanity of mercy and grace.
Now we've got a problem.
On this specific question,though, should we cooperate with
(43:03):
authorities?
I would go Paul and Romans inActs 16 on this as a practical
matter.
Act 16 on this as a practicalmatter.
For now at least, we're stillblessed to live in a country
with structure and laws and I'mnot a legal scholar by any means
.
But our Fourth Amendment, andthis probable cause, is there
(43:31):
for a reason to stop suspicious,a suspicion of people.
My concern about saying, yeah,you can come just monitor and
just watch, is that not just forthe practical matter of you
(43:52):
know, we're here to catch people?
It's you are creating asuspicious atmosphere
unnecessarily and that, to me,is problematic.
You know, we we had an event atour church building one time
with our neighbors.
We live in a section eighthousing low income, high crime
(44:15):
rate, and we allowed some peoplefrom an apartment complex to
use our church building for ameeting and there was this kind
of debate on should we have astrong police presence there to
send a signal.
What signal are we trying tosend, you know?
And so I think, if, if theyfollow the law, as our tradition
(44:42):
in America is, that there isprobable cause for a reason, I
do think we should participateas best we can, while still
clinging to the humanity andfair treatment of people, but
just some broad general we can,while still clinging to the
humanity and fair treatment ofpeople, but just some broad
general.
We know there are a lot ofimmigrants here and we want to
sit and just kind of monitor.
(45:03):
I do think in our legaltradition and consistent with,
say, act 16, is to say no, ourlegal tradition says you need
probable cause to do thesethings and we don't want to
create an atmosphere ofsuspicion that prevents us from
ministering to people becausethey're afraid without a
probable cause.
(45:23):
Context Now again, I'm not alegal scholar but I just think
on a practical level, I thinkthe church should be very
careful to say you guys takecare of that, but you follow our
own procedures in legaltradition and we're going to
minister without asking thosequestions.
BT Irwin (45:41):
Well.
Dr Beller, thank you foranswering the hard questions
today.
I think you did a great job.
Thank you, bt.
Always an honor.
That's all for this time.
Thank you again to each of ourguests Esau Verdine, paul Hunker
and Dr Jeremy Beller, andthanks to you, the listener, for
engaging this topic with anopen mind.
You'll find links to resourcesand stories in the show notes.
(46:01):
We hope that something youheard in this episode encouraged
, enlightened or enriched you insome way.
If it did, please thank God andpay it forward.
Subscribe to this podcast andshare it with a friend.
Recommend and review itwherever you listen to your
favorite podcasts.
Your subscription,recommendation and review help
us reach more people.
Please send your comments,ideas and suggestions to podcast
(46:24):
at christianchronicleorg anddon't forget our ministry to
inform and inspire Christiansand congregations around the
world is a non-profit ministrythat relies on your generosity.
So if you like the show and youwant to keep it going and make
it better, please make atax-deductible gift to the
Christian Chronicle atchristianchronicleorg.
The Christian Chronicle podcastis a production of the Christian
(46:47):
Chronicle Incorporated,informing and inspiring Church
of Christ congregations, membersand ministries around the world
since 1943.
The Christian Chronicle'smanaging editor is Audrey
Jackson, editor-in-chief BobbyRoss Jr, and executive director
and CEO Eric Trigestad.
The Christian Chronicle iswritten, directed, hosted and
edited by BT Irwin and isproduced by James Flanagan at
(47:09):
Podcast your Voice Studios inthe Motor City, detroit,
michigan, usa.
Until next time, may grace andpeace be yours in abundance.