Jesus and refugees

Safehands · 22-09-2015 11:14PM #1

I regularly try to imagine what Jesus would say about any given situation in the world today. I wonder what he would say about bringing refugees who reject this Christian message in favour of the message of Islam, into Christian countries. I suspect he would want to support them and try to change their views, but for those who criticise his teachings and refuse to change, would he still support them?

uck51js9zml2yt · 22-09-2015 11:20PM

Safehands wrote: »

I regularly try to imagine what Jesus would say about any given situation in the world today. I wonder what he would say about bringing refugees who reject this Christian message in favour of the message of Islam, into Christian countries. I suspect he would want to support them and try to change their views, but for those who criticise his teachings and refuse to change, would he still support them?

scripture says that "He died for ALL." I think that sums Him up.

Benny_Cake · 22-09-2015 11:58PM

Safehands wrote: »

I regularly try to imagine what Jesus would say about any given situation in the world today. I wonder what he would say about bringing refugees who reject this Christian message in favour of the message of Islam, into Christian countries. I suspect he would want to support them and try to change their views, but for those who criticise his teachings and refuse to change, would he still support them?

It's a dangerous thing to make assumptions about what Jesus would do, but the Gospel does say that He was a refugee shortly after his birth. Also, we are called upon to see Him in all people, regardless of race or creed, and love them unconditionally, as Christ loves us.

The Randy Riverbeast · 23-09-2015 02:13AM

The Good Samaritan comes to mind. One person helping another despite being part of two groups which get along.

I don't see how being a part of another religion would make them unworthy of being helped.

Peregrinus · 23-09-2015 02:49AM

Safehands wrote: »

I regularly try to imagine what Jesus would say about any given situation in the world today. I wonder what he would say about bringing refugees who reject this Christian message in favour of the message of Islam, into Christian countries. I suspect he would want to support them and try to change their views, but for those who criticise his teachings and refuse to change, would he still support them?

Of course. He calls us to heal the sick, visit the imprisoned, comfort those who mourn. He never calls us to heal the Christian sick, visit the Christian imprisoned or comfort the Christians who mourn.

The notion of refusing refuge to the persecuted because they are not Christian makes about as much sense as the notion of turning the sick away from hospital because they're not Christian. It would be an obscenity.

Turtwig · 23-09-2015 03:06AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

the notion of turning the sick away from hospital because they're not Christian.

Yep only non Christians get sick.

I'm sorry I couldn't pass up the opportunity to illustrate the power of quote mining and context.

Absoluvely · 23-09-2015 03:12AM

Peregrinus wrote: »

turning the sick away from hospital

/turning the schoolless children away from school

Safehands · 23-09-2015 09:55AM

The Randy Riverbeast wrote: »

The Good Samaritan comes to mind. One person helping another despite being part of two groups which get along.

I don't see how being a part of another religion would make them unworthy of being helped.

I have read that some of the refugees have actually killed those of a different faith. Obviously such people feel very strongly about their religion and will not be persuaded that they are wrong. It is somewhat ironic that they should turn to Christian countries to save them, but I suspect they will be trying to spread their beliefs when they get here. How would Christ feel about that? I'm really not sure.

Peregrinus · 23-09-2015 10:10AM

Are you not? Perhaps this will help to clarify things for you.

The gospels really couldn't be clearer on this. We are callled to help the poor, the sick, the imprisoned, the bereaved, the homeless because they are in need. Not because they're in need and we like them. Or because they're in need and they're virtuous. Or because they're in need and we have something in common with them. Just because they are in need. Is that so difficult to grasp?

And, lest we are tempted to read in an exemption that says that we don't have to help them if we disapprove of them or are afraid of them, the gospels helpfully address that very point. Love your enemies. Do good to those who persecute you. If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also; and from anyone who takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt. If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? But love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return.

Could it be any clearer?

The Randy Riverbeast · 23-09-2015 12:12PM

Safehands wrote: »

I have read that some of the refugees have actually killed those of a different faith. Obviously such people feel very strongly about their religion and will not be persuaded that they are wrong. It is somewhat ironic that they should turn to Christian countries to save them, but I suspect they will be trying to spread their beliefs when they get here. How would Christ feel about that? I'm really not sure.

Some, would Jesus have refused to help someone just because another one of their people committed a crime? You also have to remember that there are many groupings of Islam which get along as much as Catholics and Protestants did in the past.

When they get here they will have religious freedom, everyone is free to spread the word of their god.

If you really want to find some sort of biblical justification for turning away Muslims when they need help then I would recommend looking to the old testament. Jesus was a bit of a bleeding heart liberal at times.

hinault · 23-09-2015 01:55PM

Peregrinus wrote: »

Are you not? Perhaps this will help to clarify things for you.

The gospels really couldn't be clearer on this. We are callled to help the poor, the sick, the imprisoned, the bereaved, the homeless because they are in need. Not because they're in need and we like them. Or because they're in need and they're virtuous. Or because they're in need and we have something in common with them. Just because they are in need. Is that so difficult to grasp?

And, lest we are tempted to read in an exemption that says that we don't have to help them if we disapprove of them or are afraid of them, the gospels helpfully address that very point. Love your enemies. Do good to those who persecute you. If anyone strikes you on the cheek, offer the other also; and from anyone who takes away your coat do not withhold even your shirt. If you love those who love you, what credit is that to you? But love your enemies, do good, and lend, expecting nothing in return.

Could it be any clearer?

I agree wholeheartedly with this.

I'd like to add one observation.

In doing all these things that you have outlined above, we're required to do all of those thing in the name of Jesus too.
This suggests that we're required to make the recipient of these works aware of the basis as to why we do such things.

Put simply if we offer help we do so in Christian charity and we're obliged to inform the recipient that this Christian charity is at the behest of the teaching of Jesus Christ.

frostyjacks · 23-09-2015 02:07PM

We have a duty to help, even if it was atheists on those boats. I'm just wary about the demographics. We are a small nation, relatively homogeneous. Now we're going to take in a massive influx of people from a totally different culture and religion to ours. In Britain they've a history of taking in large numbers of Jews, Irish, West Indians, Ugandan Asians etc. over the years. We're a bit new to it.

katydid · 23-09-2015 04:07PM

Safehands wrote: »

I regularly try to imagine what Jesus would say about any given situation in the world today. I wonder what he would say about bringing refugees who reject this Christian message in favour of the message of Islam, into Christian countries. I suspect he would want to support them and try to change their views, but for those who criticise his teachings and refuse to change, would he still support them?

Jesus was a refugee, when he fled with his parents to Egypt.

Just sayin..

He spoke to outsiders, even when his society disapproved. He talked to the Samaritan woman - the Samaritans were once Jews who had split off from Judaism. (It would be like a Roman Catholic from Belfast talking to a Protestant at certain times in our history). He cured the daughter of the Syrophonecian woman, again, a woman of a different race and religion.

The question is actually quite silly, if you know anything about the life and actions of Jesus.

katydid · 23-09-2015 04:11PM

frostyjacks wrote: »

We have a duty to help, even if it was atheists on those boats. I'm just wary about the demographics. We are a small nation, relatively homogeneous. Now we're going to take in a massive influx of people from a totally different culture and religion to ours. In Britain they've a history of taking in large numbers of Jews, Irish, West Indians, Ugandan Asians etc. over the years. We're a bit new to it.

Massive influx? Five thousand? I know our population is small, but come on, that's a small village.

katydid · 23-09-2015 04:12PM

hinault wrote: »

I agree wholeheartedly with this.

In doing all these things that you have outlined above, we're required to do all of those thing in the name of Jesus too.
This suggests that we're required to make the recipient of these works aware of the basis as to why we do such things.

Put simply if we offer help we do so in Christian charity and we're obliged to inform the recipient that this Christian charity is at the behest of the teaching of Jesus Christ.

That's not what "doing something in the name of Jesus" means. You don't have to advertise the fact. That you are doing it, and you are known to be a Christian, means you are showing good example.

Peregrinus · 23-09-2015 04:41PM

hinault wrote: »

I'd like to add one observation.

In doing all these things that you have outlined above, we're required to do all of those thing in the name of Jesus too.
This suggests that we're required to make the recipient of these works aware of the basis as to why we do such things.

Put simply if we offer help we do so in Christian charity and we're obliged to inform the recipient that this Christian charity is at the behest of the teaching of Jesus Christ.

I disagree. In Jesus' account of salvation those on the right hand wh fed the sick, comforted the bereaved, etc are treated as having served God even though they had absolutely no idea that that is what they were doing, and obviously couldn't have communicated that insight to those they helped. Healing the sick, etc, is something that we are called to do for its own sake. If done for its own sake it is itself a witness of the gospel. It is not some we do as a handy ancillary to explicit catechesis.

credoie · 23-09-2015 06:58PM

Safehands wrote: »

I regularly try to imagine what Jesus would say about any given situation in the world today. I wonder what he would say about bringing refugees who reject this Christian message in favour of the message of Islam, into Christian countries. I suspect he would want to support them and try to change their views, but for those who criticise his teachings and refuse to change, would he still support them?

I think we would all know the answer if we read the Gospels start to end.

credoie · 23-09-2015 07:04PM

Well as far as the Catholic church goes, there are 2 refugee families now living in the Vatican.

katydid · 23-09-2015 07:08PM

credoie wrote: »

Well as far as the Catholic church goes, there are 2 refugee families now living in the Vatican.

Wow. TWO. In the entire "state" of the Vatican

credoie · 23-09-2015 07:11PM

katydid wrote: »

Wow. TWO. In the entire "state" of the Vatican

Yes 2, Just to put that in context, 1% of the vatican population is refugee. This highest % among all states in europe.

Leading by example.

uck51js9zml2yt · 23-09-2015 07:23PM

credoie wrote: »

Yes 2, Just to put that in context, 1% of the vatican population is refugee. This highest % among all states in europe.

Leading by example.

I'm sure Frances has a lot more rooms spare.

credoie · 23-09-2015 07:32PM

Marilyn Chubby Hitch wrote: »

I'm sure Frances has a lot more rooms spare.

289,451 vacant dwellings around Ireland at the time of Census 2011.

katydid · 23-09-2015 08:23PM

credoie wrote: »

289,451 vacant dwellings around Ireland at the time of Census 2011.

We're not talking about Ireland. We're talking about the Vatican, where, with all their riches and space, they have TWO families.

katydid · 23-09-2015 08:25PM

credoie wrote: »

Yes 2, Just to put that in context, 1% of the vatican population is refugee. This highest % among all states in europe.

Leading by example.

Good one. And what is the demographic of the Vatican? How many families live there? How many women (that aren't nuns)? How many children?

You can say that 100% of the children in the Vatican are refugees, if you want to start playing with figures and words.

hinault · 23-09-2015 09:25PM

credoie wrote: »

Yes 2, Just to put that in context, 1% of the vatican population is refugee. This highest % among all states in europe.

Leading by example.

Using 1% per capita measurement, Ireland would be required to grant refuge to 45,000 refugees.

katydid · 23-09-2015 09:28PM

hinault wrote: »

Using 1% per capita measurement, Ireland would be required to grant refuge to 45,000 refugees.

When Ireland is a small city worth billions, occupied by celibates, we can make a comparison.

Safehands · 23-09-2015 11:05PM

katydid wrote: »

Jesus was a refugee, when he fled with his parents to Egypt.
Just sayin..
He spoke to outsiders, even when his society disapproved. He talked to the Samaritan woman - the Samaritans were once Jews who had split off from Judaism. (It would be like a Roman Catholic from Belfast talking to a Protestant at certain times in our history). He cured the daughter of the Syrophonecian woman, again, a woman of a different race and religion.

All very valid points Katy. We have a modern, quite civilised, liberal society in Europe. We treat, or try to treat, diversity with respect. We welcome marraige between same sex couples, we embrace a culture where alcohol is freely available and sex between consenting adults, whether married or single, is not frowned upon. In other words, our countries are only nominally Christian.
A large proportion of the Refugees and Migrants are of a very different culture. I suppose, when you think about it, their religious views would be far closer to what Christ believed in than the religious views of the liberal folk who are going to welcome them into their countries. These people take their religion very seriously. I believe that sooner or later, there is going to be a major clash of cultures which will be passed off as Christian v Islam, which it will not really be. I don't think Christ would be particularly comfortable living in downtown Amsterdam today, do you? He would certainly be a very busy man if he lived there.

katydid · 23-09-2015 11:17PM

Safehands wrote: »

All very valid points Katy. We have a modern, quite civilised, liberal society in Europe. We treat, or try to treat, diversity with respect. We welcome marraige between same sex couples, we embrace a culture where alcohol is freely available and sex between consenting adults, whether married or single, is not frowned upon. In other words, our countries are only nominally Christian.
A large proportion of the Refugees and Migrants are of a very different culture. I suppose, when you think about it, their religious views would be far closer to what Christ believed in than the religious views of the liberal folk who are going to welcome them into their countries. These people take their religion very seriously. I believe that sooner or later, there is going to be a major clash of cultures which will be passed off as Christian v Islam, which it will not really be. I don't think Christ would be particularly comfortable living in downtown Amsterdam today, do you? He would certainly be a very busy man if he lived there.

I'm not sure I follow you. There's no clash between Christianity and being tolerant towards those you don't agree with.

Somehow I doubt if Christ, who reached out to the poor and marginalised, would hold the beliefs that many Muslims hold. He respected women, and he didn't condemn sinners.

I think he would garner a lot of respect in downtown Amsterdam. He was quite comfortable amongst those who didn't conform

Safehands · 23-09-2015 11:22PM

katydid wrote: »

I'm not sure I follow you. There's no clash between Christianity and being tolerant towards those you don't agree with.

Of course not, the clash will be between the ones with the very liberal views and the very strict Islamic folk who don't agree with their ways. Just my opinion Katy.

Peregrinus · 24-09-2015 03:34AM

Safehands wrote: »

All very valid points Katy. We have a modern, quite civilised, liberal society in Europe. We treat, or try to treat, diversity with respect. We welcome marraige between same sex couples, we embrace a culture where alcohol is freely available and sex between consenting adults, whether married or single, is not frowned upon. In other words, our countries are only nominally Christian.
A large proportion of the Refugees and Migrants are of a very different culture . . .

I dunno that they are, actually. Syria is not exactly a hotbed of fundamentalism. It's quite religiously diverse, you have always been able to buy alcohol there and, while sex between unmarried people is generally socially frowned upon, it's not illegal, and it does go on. Syria isn't exactly noted for its honour killings. True, they don't welcome marriage between same sex couples but, then, neither did we, up to a few months ago.

In other words, Syria isn't quite as foreign as you seem to suggest. In terms of social mores, it would be very familiar to anyone who lived in Ireland in the 1970s, say.

Safehands wrote: »

I suppose, when you think about it, their religious views would be far closer to what Christ believed in than the religious views of the liberal folk who are going to welcome them into their countries.

Only if you reduce "religious views" to "views about sex". Two of the three issues you mention have to do with sex and, on the third, alcohol, Islamic views are quite different from the views of Jesus.

Safehands wrote: »

These people take their religion very seriously. I believe that sooner or later, there is going to be a major clash of cultures which will be passed off as Christian v Islam, which it will not really be.

Who's going to pass it off in those terms? Most discussions of a "culture war" express it in terms of Islam -v- modernity, or Islam -v- Enlightenment.

Safehands wrote: »

I don't think Christ would be particularly comfortable living in downtown Amsterdam today, do you? He would certainly be a very busy man if he lived there.

He was noted for hanging out with drunkards, prostitutes and sinners, for welcoming them, and for partying with them. So, yes, I think Christ would be very present in downtown Amsterdam.

But,in the present context, isn't all of this a complete red herring? It really comes down to this; if you take in large numbers of traumatised refugees from a foreign culture, then there is inevitably going to be cultural dislocation and culture clashes. If you want to make a case that, as a result, we should strictly limit the number of refugees we will afford protection to, go ahead. That would apply to refugees from all wars, not just Muslim refugees from this war.

But this wouldn't be a gospel-based case; "avoiding cultural dislocation" is not a gospel value. And if that's the answer you want to arrive at is "we should not support refugees who reject Christianity" you're really starting off on the wrong foot if your opening gambit is to ask what Jesus would say, because everything we know about Jesus suggests that that is absolutely, definitely not what he would say.

Maybe this is a challenge for all of us, Safehands. Are we looking for security and safety, or are we looking to follow the Gospel?

(I refrain from making cheap comments about your username!

)

Peregrinus · 24-09-2015 05:47AM

katydid wrote: »

When Ireland is a small city worth billions, occupied by celibates, we can make a comparison.

I'm not sure we can, actually.

The Vatican City State isn't a terribly good place to resettle refugee families. It doesn't contain a single school, for one thing, or a hospital. There's one shop selling groceries; none at all selling clothing (unless you count the souvenir baseball caps they sell in the post office). Employment opportunities are negligible for people who don't want to be either clerics or soldiers. And Vatican residents, unless they also hold an EU citizenship or an Italian residence permit, have no access to the health services, social services, etc of the Italian Republic. I think the significance of actually housing refugees in the Vatican is symbolic. It will be a short-term arrangement only, and the refugees concerned will be keen to move on to more permanent settlement in a place where they might actually want to build a life for themselves.

It's fair to ask what the Catholic church (or any church) is doing in response to the refugee crisis, but counting the number of refugees housed in the Vatican doesn't offer a meaningful answer. How many refugees are living in Lambeth Palace? Or in the entire property estate of the Church of England (which is much greater than the property estate of the Vatican)? How many refugees are living at the Palace of Nations in Geneva, the headquarters of the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (the second-largest palace complex in Europe and, therefore, much larger than the Vatican)?

These agencies may have extensive property, or diplomatic/extraterritorial status, or both. But the contribution we look to them to make doesn't really consist in moving refugees into their own offices and apartments. This is not a useful measure of anything.

Jesus and refugees

Comments