Abstract
In view of the current crisis and controversies related to immigration, this article examines views of American evangelicals on the subject. Statements issued by national evangelical leaders and organizations generally call for immigration reform balancing concerns for law and order and border security with a call for the compassionate treatment of immigrants and creation of pathways to citizenship. But a survey of the numerous empirical studies on grassroots evangelical views on immigration reveals several paradoxes. Not only are the opinions of average evangelicals on immigration more restrictive than those expressed in the aforementioned statements, but their attitudes and the manner in which they form their opinions appear inconsistent with evangelical convictions. Compared to all other religious groups, white evangelicals have the most negative views regarding immigration. Underlying factors include the failure of evangelical churches to address the topic of immigration, a separation of personal ethics from views on public policy, lack of interaction between evangelicals and immigrants, Christian nationalism, and other social influences.
Controversies and crises related to immigration dominate the daily news and evoke emotional responses. This is not only a divisive issue in the United States, but across Europe and in other regions there is a growing wave of nationalism and anti-foreigner sentiments, as reflected in the rise of right-wing, anti-immigration political movements. Polarization is inevitable given the rhetoric so commonly employed in public discourse. Concerns over both public policy and personal attitudes towards immigrants touch on fundamental questions of human rights, law and order, justice, and compassion. Evangelicals, like everyone else, have their opinions on the issues. But what are the predominant views of American evangelicals and how do they arrive at them?
A growing body of empirical research has explored such questions. This article will survey recent empirical studies on the attitudes and opinions of evangelicals on immigration. These studies were identified through searches on EBSCO Academic Search Complete, the websites of several religious research institutes, and online Google searches. Most of the data reported here are from national random surveys in the United States as reported in peer-reviewed academic journals and by recognized research centers, in particular by the Pew Research Center, Lifeway Research, and the Public Religion Research Institute. A number of these studies compare views of evangelicals with those of other Christian traditions, other religious groups, or national averages. From this data a relatively consistent picture emerges that, generally speaking, the views of evangelicals on immigration differ significantly from the views of other groups.
Of course the category “evangelical” is broad, including people with a wide range of opinions on social issues. Most surveys categorize respondents simply on the basis of their self-identification as evangelicals. Some studies isolate the views of white evangelicals. We might wish that more of the data could be analyzed in terms of age, gender, ethnicity, beliefs, church attendance, or geography. But the studies seldom provide such detail. Nevertheless general tendencies can be identified from the data that pose several paradoxes in trying to understand evangelical views on immigration. This article will review those findings and map out several tensions in evangelical thinking and practice on this matter. In the words of Betsy Woodruff, evangelical perspectives on immigration are of “Byzantine complexity” (2013).
Statements of evangelical leaders on immigration
Before turning to the empirical studies, we first examine views articulated by evangelical leaders on issues related to immigration. Several statements have been issued by evangelical organizations and resolutions adopted by evangelical denominations that broadly represent the views of evangelical leaders. These statements consistently advocate for the just and compassionate treatment of immigrants by both churches and in government policy. They typically call for policy reforms that reflect values of compassion, human dignity, and preservation of the family, as well as reasonable legislation to both secure borders and provide pathways for legal immigration. Such statements are intended not only for the ears of politicians, but also as a guide for ordinary Christians as they shape their opinions. Three brief examples will suffice to illustrate the point.
The National Association of Evangelicals
The National Association of Evangelicals (NAE) is perhaps the broadest and most representative public voice of evangelicals. “It represents more than 45,000 local churches from 40 different denominations and serves a constituency of millions” (https://www.nae.net/about-nae/). In 2012 the NAE drafted an open letter to President Obama shortly after his reelection in 2012 that was signed by over 150 well-known evangelical leaders, stating, We are already working across the country to educate and mobilize our fellow evangelical Christians to support just immigration laws. Support for reform is growing in our churches, denominations, campuses and communities. We stand ready to support legislation that reflects our Christian values and builds the common good. We are driven by a moral obligation rooted deeply in our faith to address the needs of immigrants in our country. Compassionate and just treatment of immigrants is a frequent topic in scripture. (NAE, 2012; emphasis added)
More recently in June 2018 the NAE issued a letter to President Trump that protested the “zero tolerance” policy and the separation of vulnerable children from their parents. It stated that “We are also concerned that there are fewer legal possibilities for those with a well-founded fear of persecution to be considered for refugee status without needing to make it to the U.S. border” (NAE, 2018).
The Southern Baptist Convention
The Southern Baptist Convention (SBC) is the largest Protestant denomination in the United States with 47,544 local churches and 15 million members (Green, 2018). In 2018 the national convention passed a resolution “On Immigration” (SBC, 2018) that begins by affirming human dignity and quoting Scripture that God command Christians “to treat immigrants with the same respect and dignity as those native born.” Believers are called to extend hospitality towards immigrants. It continues by reaffirming a 2011 resolution “On Immigration and the Gospel,” calling “our governing authorities to prioritize efforts to secure the borders and to hold businesses accountable for hiring practices as they relate to immigration status” and to create “a just and compassionate path to legal status.” It then reads, RESOLVED: That we desire to see immigration reform include an emphasis on securing our borders and providing a pathway to legal status with appropriate restitutionary measures, maintaining the priority of family unity, resulting in an efficient immigration system that honors the value and dignity of those seeking a better life for themselves and their families and be it further RESOLVED, That we declare that any form of nativism, mistreatment, or exploitation is inconsistent with the gospel of Jesus Christ; … RESOLVED, That we encourage pastors to address immigration issues with their local churches and to exhort their congregations to serve their local immigrant communities; and be it finally RESOLVED, That we affirm that all immigrants are either brothers and sisters in Christ or people whom God loves and has given us an opportunity to reach with the gospel where otherwise they may never have heard.
This resolution expresses the combined desire for just and compassionate treatment of immigrants and passing of legislation reflecting those values, while also affirming the importance of the rule of law. Numerous other examples with a similar tone adopted by evangelical denominations and organizations could be cited.
The Evangelical Immigration Table
The Evangelical Immigration Table (EIT) advocates for immigration policies that reflect a balanced humanitarian response to the current political crisis and chaos surrounding immigration. Their principles state, As evangelical Christian leaders, we call for a bipartisan solution on immigration that: • Respects the God-given dignity of every person • Protects the unity of the immediate family • Respects the rule of law • Guarantees secure national borders • Ensures fairness to taxpayers • Establishes a path toward legal status and/or citizenship for those who qualify and who wish to become permanent residents. (EIT, n.d.)
In view of the government shutdown in January 2019, the EIT published a letter affirmed by 8000 evangelical leaders to the president and congress: At this critical time, we encourage you to work together on a bipartisan basis … to ensure that our borders are secure and to establish a process by which those who are unlawfully present in the country are able to rectify their status and eventually become Lawful Permanent Residents by meeting certain established criteria. (EIT, 2019)
The general tone of EIT’s resources and publications is progressive, advocating Christian ministry to immigrants. EIT enjoys the support of the widest imaginable representation of diverse evangelical organizations and leaders. Its partners include, among others, the Council for Christian Colleges and Universities, the Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission of the SBC, the NAE, World Relief, the heads of some 30 evangelical denominations, the leaders of over 30 evangelical universities and seminaries, not to mention numerous evangelical networks, organizations, artists, business leaders, and pastors (EIT n.d.). Publications by M. Daniel Carroll R. such as Christians at the Border: Immigration, the Church and the Bible (2008) provide some of the strongest biblical arguments for this position.
Diversity of views among evangelical leaders
Alternative viewpoints to the above statements have also been expressed by what appears to be a minority of evangelical leaders. For example, an ad hoc organization, Evangelicals for Biblical Immigration (EBI), supports very restrictive reforms that strengthen the borders, strictly enforce immigration law, and oppose amnesty for undocumented immigrants (https://evangelicalsforbiblicalimmigration.com/about/). However, it does not make public the names of its leaders or supporters. Prominent evangelicals such as the author Eric Metaxas and Tim Wildmon, President of the American Family Association, are reported to support EBI initiatives (Leahy, 2013). James Hoffmeier’s The Immigration Crisis: Immigrants, Aliens, and the Bible (2009) expresses viewpoints and biblical arguments largely consistent with this view.
Christianity Today (CT) is the most influential and widely read evangelical magazine in America, claiming to have some 336,000 readers and 475,000 email subscribers (http://www.christianitytodayads.com). Thus opinions expressed in CT can be expected to reflect views of leading evangelical thinkers. A study was conducted surveying articles published in CT between 2007 and 2012 that were related to immigration (Kaftan, 2014). It found that of 29 such articles a range of views were expressed:
1 the need for increased border protection
12 sympathetic towards immigrants
11 neither sympathetic nor advocating for stricter enforcement
9 theological justification/discussion of religious doctrine
8 called for social justice
6 execution of justice/focus on legality
7 anti-Illegal Immigration legislation
23 extension of grace to the outsider
Although the findings found a range of views, the study concludes, “Only one article was visibly critical of Evangelical leaders leaning toward liberalizing immigration reform” (Kaftan, 2014: 200).
From these examples it can be concluded that, on the whole, national-level evangelical leaders take a nuanced, but overall positive approach to policies and attitudes related to immigration reform. While all support the rule of law and border security, the dominant tone among most is humanitarian. They unequivocally affirm the humanity and dignity of immigrants, frequently quoting Scripture. They call Christians to act compassionately, exercise hospitality, and share the gospel with immigrants. Both the NAE and the SBC explicitly express the intention that Christians or churches be educated about these positions.
The relative importance of immigration as a concern among evangelicals
Before looking at the specific attitudes of grassroots evangelicals on immigration, it’s worth noting the relative importance with which evangelicals view the issue. A Pew Research Center study (2010) queried which social issues are considered “very important,” finding that of white evangelicals 91% named the economy, 88% jobs, and 67% immigration. Given developments in America since 2010, those numbers may be very different today. But the term “immigration” is impersonal at best, a political football at worst, and is more easily reduced to a matter of law and order. Surveys regarding immigration seldom formulate the questions in terms of the plight of immigrants who may be fleeing persecution, war, famine, and violence. Popular rhetoric often frames the issue in terms of immigrants simply seeking a better life or even having criminal intent. Furthermore, “The language of legality can obscure issues that are fundamentally related to race and class” (Hayden, 2010: 161).
Five paradoxes in evangelical views on immigration
How do the aforementioned public statements by national evangelical leaders align with the opinions and attitudes of ordinary evangelicals? What are the opinions of grassroots evangelicals regarding immigration and how do those views align with their faith convictions? An examination of the data reveals five paradoxes in answering these questions.
Paradox 1: Compassion vs. law and order
So what are the views of evangelicals on immigration? We begin with a Lifeway Research (2015) study “Evangelical Views on Immigration” sponsored by the EIT and World Relief. It was based upon a random sample survey of 1000 persons who consider themselves “an evangelical, a born-again, or a fundamentalist Christian.” It found:
On the positive side 82% of evangelicals believe immigration reform should respect people’s God-given dignity, 72% “believe immigration reform should protect the unity of the immediate family, and roughly 6 of 10 believe that immigration reform should establish a path toward legal status or citizenship.”
On the more negative side 48% believe the number of immigrants to the USA are a drain on economic resources, 22% saw them as a threat to law and order, 21% as a threat to the safety of citizens, and 20% as a threat to American customs and traditions.
This picture does not radically depart from the aforementioned statements by evangelical leaders, but other studies do, especially when isolating the views of white evangelicals. For example, a 2010 Pew Research Center study found that compared to all other groups, white evangelicals evidenced the most negative attitudes related to immigration. In ranking the importance of immigration related issues,
42% of evangelicals place a priority on strict enforcement of current immigration laws (more than all other ethnic and religious groups);
Only 15% support creating a path to citizenship (lowest of all groups);
Only 27% say “immigrants strengthen the country with their hard work and talents” (lowest of all groups);
Only 36% say immigrants strengthen society and don’t threaten traditional values (lowest of all groups).
A later Pew Research Center (2013) study found, that nearly two-thirds of white Evangelicals said that there should be a way for undocumented immigrants to stay in the USA legally (much more than the previous study), but a third believed that they should not be allowed to stay. These findings made white evangelicals the most negative towards immigration compared to other religious groups. The report concludes, When it comes to perceptions of immigrants in general, 55% of white evangelicals believe immigrants are a burden because they take jobs, housing and health care away from current residents, while about as many (58%) say they threaten traditional American customs and values. That compares to the overall U.S. public where, by a 49% to 41% margin, immigrants are seen as a strength to the country. The public at large also believes, by 52% to 43%, that the growing number of immigrants strengthens U.S. society rather than threatens its values. (Drake, 2013)
A Public Religion Research Institute (PRRI) study also conducted in 2013 yields an even more negative picture. While 43% of all Americans support the statement, “We should make serious efforts to deport all illegal immigrants back to their home countries,” 63% of evangelicals endorsed it. Furthermore 69% of evangelicals compared to 53% of the general population affirm the statement “The American way of life needs to be protected against foreign influence” (Djupe, 2013).
Such data show an ambivalence among evangelicals who are on the one hand in favor of humane treatment of immigrants and keeping families together, but on the other hand place a higher value on law and order and view immigrants negatively. The 2015 Lifeway study found that
nearly 9 of 10 evangelicals believe that immigration reform should respect the rule of law and secure the borders;
68% support both increases in border security and a path to citizenship;
only 42% see their presence as an opportunity to show love and share the gospel;
only 2 of 5 see their presence as an opportunity to show them love.
Several paradoxes become apparent from this data. The first is that although evangelicals overwhelmingly believe that immigrants should be treated with dignity as bearers of the divine image, concerns for law and order overshadow concerns to show them compassion. This view may be explained in part by separating in their thinking on matters of public policy (rule of law) from matters of personal relations with immigrants (personal ethics). But the evidence appears stronger that this paradox is due in larger part to their belief that most immigrants are a threat to American values, are a drain on taxes and health care, and have not come to America out of genuine need. It should also be noted that evangelicals’ concern for border security and enforcement of immigration law go hand in hand with a desire for legal reforms. But it is not clear exactly what, in their view, such reforms should specifically entail.
Paradox 2: To evangelize or not to evangelize?
A mark of evangelicals is their commitment to evangelism. So not surprisingly, according to the Lifeway study 73% of evangelicals agree that “the arrival of immigrants presents a great opportunity to share Jesus Christ.” Yet there was some ambivalence even here, because in the same survey with a rephrasing of the question, only 42% agreed with the statement that “the number of recent immigrants in the U.S. are an opportunity to introduce them to Jesus Christ” (Lifeway, 2015). Furthermore only “1 in 5 Evangelicals say they have ever been encouraged by their local church to reach out to immigrants in their communities.” As we will discuss below, relatively few evangelicals actually have personal interaction with immigrants (Djupe, 2013; Lifeway, 2015) and many are bothered by interactions with non-English speaking immigrants (Cox and Jones, 2017). Thus opportunities to evangelize or demonstrate compassion are limited. We confront here a second paradox: evangelicals believe that immigrants should be evangelized, but churches seldom encourage them to do so and few have relationships with them. This of course begs the question, What is the responsibility of pastors in forming opinions on matters related to immigration?
Paradox 3: Views of national leaders vs. views of the rank and file
It is evident from the above data that on average, persons self-identifying as evangelical have more negative attitudes towards immigrants and lean towards more restrictive immigration policies than their national-level leaders. This gap is particularly pronounced when examining the views of white evangelicals who comprise three-quarters of all evangelicals in America (Pew Research Center, 2014a). Empirical studies have consistently established that although attendance at religious services reduces animus towards immigrants, evangelicals have more negative attitudes towards immigrants than those of other Christian traditions (e.g. Daniels and von der Ruhr, 2005; Knoll, 2009; McDaniel et al., 2011; Kim, 2017: 99).
Thus a third paradox can be identified: evangelicals, especially white evangelicals, have not only more negative attitudes towards immigrants and more restrictive views on immigration policy than most Americans, but also do not reflect the views of their national leaders. Apparently the desire of the NAE to “educate and mobilize” believers to adopt positions and take action consistent with views expressed in their public statements has had limited success. EIT launched in 2013 a “40-day challenge” encouraging congregations to study daily 40 biblical texts related to immigration, and hosted a grassroots “Pray4Reform,” with an aggressive ad campaign to reach evangelicals. But the impact was questionable. Thus the question arises regarding how evangelical congregants form their opinions on immigration. Why are they not following the lead of their recognized, national leaders? Why is there a gap between their views, and statements affirmed by majority votes at denominational conferences?
Paradox 4: The silent pulpit
Surveys reveal that 60% of white evangelicals look to religion most for guidance on right and wrong (Pew Research Center, 2014b). But this number drops dramatically on the question of immigration, with only 12% of white evangelicals claiming that religion is the most important influence (Pew Research Center, 2010). Lifeway’s 2015 study was even more sobering with only 2% of evangelicals saying that the church influenced their views on immigration.
The question arises, to what extent is immigration addressed in evangelical churches? According to the 2010 Pew study of all groups, “About one-in-four churchgoers (24%) say the clergy at their places of worship have spoken out about immigration … About half of those who hear about immigration in church say their clergy are favorable to immigrants and immigration, but nearly one-quarter are hearing anti-immigration messages.” Given the fact that evangelical clergy are more reluctant than others to address controversial political issues in church, it is a small wonder that Lifeway’s 2015 study found only 2% of evangelicals saying that the church influenced their views on immigration. These findings stand in contrast to the aforementioned statements by evangelical leaders calling on churches to educate their congregants on matters related to immigration, which brings us to a fourth paradox: although national level evangelical leaders and organizations have spoken out on immigration and the need to inform congregations on the issue, relatively few evangelical churches or pastors have done so.
Views of pastors on immigration appear to be only slightly more liberal than their congregants. For example 8 out of 10 Protestant pastors agree that the US government has the responsibility to stop illegal immigration. But 76% agree or strongly agree that Christians have a responsibility to assist immigrants, even if they are in the country illegally (Lifeway, 2019). So why are such ethical obligations and pressing issues avoided or excluded from preaching and teaching, although the theme occurs frequently in Scripture?
At this point we can only make an educated guess as to the reasons that the topic is seldom addressed in evangelical churches. Forthcoming research should help us discover more reliable answers. Some pastors may be simply uninformed because such issues have not been addressed in their seminary ethics class, nor has the issue been a major topic in denominational publications, conferences, or other initiatives. Other pastors may see immigration as a complex, strictly political issue, and believe it is inappropriate to broach such topics in the church (although most white evangelical pastors have little compunction about addressing public policies regarding abortion and gay marriage). In not a few cases pastors may fear the consequences of raising a topic that is controversial, political, or unpopular, thus potentially alienating congregants, losing members, or even losing their job. The topic can become quickly divisive. As one pastor recently said to us, “To raise this issue in my church would be like throwing a hand grenade into the congregation.” Thus it will require great wisdom and patience along with boldness to lead congregations into discussions that biblically explore matters related to immigration.
Paradox 5: The (ir)relevance of biblical authority
Evangelicals are known for their high view of biblical authority. But is the Bible a major influence in forming their views on immigration? The 2015 Lifeway study found that while 53% claim that they are “very familiar with what the Bible says about how immigrants should be treated,” only 12% said the Bible most influenced their views on immigration. Interacting with immigrants (17%), friends and family (16%), or the media (16%) were more important than the Bible. Here a fifth paradox emerges: evangelicals claim to know biblical teaching on immigration, but they do not see that teaching as most influential in their opinion on immigration.
This finding should give evangelicals pause, who so highly regard biblical authority. Are evangelicals as biblically faithful as they claim? A possible explanation for the seeming lack of importance of biblical teaching in forming evangelicals’ views on immigration may be a separation in their thinking between biblical teaching to love one’s neighbor at the personal level, and public policies of a complex political nature. In this view the Bible only offers general ethical guidelines, but is silent when it comes to specific immigration legislation. For example Mark Amstutz in Just Immigration: American Policy in Christian Perspective argues that the Christian faith offers helpful moral principles from which to consider policy matters, but the “Christian faith does not offer answers to specific policy concerns” on immigration. He claims that the church should provide moral education but not get involved in the intricacies of international migration (2017: 237). Or as Eric Metaxas told the National Review, “The Scriptures are very clear that God commands us to ‘care for the strangers and aliens among us.’ But to leap from that to enacting destructive immigration policies is exceedingly sloppy thinking and shallow theology, neither of which benefits anyone” (Woodruff, 2013).
This is not to underestimate the complexity of balancing loving our neighbor while maintaining law and order in matters relating to immigration. However, if it is true that only 40% of evangelicals see the presence of immigrants as an opportunity to show them love, and only 42% as an opportunity to introduce them to Christ (Lifeway, 2015), then there is reason to question the validity of this explanation at a deeper level. For an astonishingly large portion of evangelicals the biblical command to love one’s neighbor, and even one’s enemy, apparently does not apply when relating to immigrants even at the personal level. Concerns for the rule of law, the protection of nationalistic ideals, or even fear, appear to override humanitarian concerns and compassion in the formation of evangelicals’ views on immigration.
Explaining the paradoxes
If the above explanations for the paradoxes alone are inadequate, the question remains why they exist. Studies have demonstrated that social factors exercise a greater influence than religion in forming opinions on public issues. For example, lower educational levels are associated with immigrant animus (Brint and Abrutyn, 2010; Lifeway, 2015, 2019; Cox and Jones, 2017), and evangelicals have lower levels of education than the national average (Smith and Masci, 2018). It has also been argued that understanding of gender roles may be more important than the Bible in shaping attitudes of evangelicals towards immigration (Du Mez, 2018). But the data point to two other factors that are likely most influential: first is the fact that most evangelicals, compared to other groups, have less personal contact with immigrants; and the second factor is evangelicals’ views on Christian nationalism and their ethnic affinity.
Lack of personal interaction with immigrants
As noted above relatively few evangelicals have personal interaction with immigrants (Djupe, 2013; Lifeway, 2015) and many are bothered by interactions with non-English speaking immigrants (Cox and Jones, 2017). We might expect that more personal interaction with immigrants would lead to more liberal views on immigration. But for white evangelicals, this is apparently not necessarily the case. The 2013 PRRI study revealed, “White evangelicals are less likely to report having friends who were born outside the US, but this factor plays little role in shaping evangelicals views toward immigrants or immigration” (Djupe, 2013). Thus even personal contact with immigrants has apparently less impact than we might hope. The 2015 Lifeway study found that for only 17% of evangelicals was personal interaction with immigrants the major factor in forming their opinion. A 2017 PRRI regional study of the Southeast and Southwest USA further probed interaction with immigrants and found, “Among religious groups [in] these regions, white evangelical Protestants are by far the most likely to be bothered by interactions with non-English speaking immigrants. A majority (57%) of white evangelical Protestants say they are bothered by such interactions” (Cox and Jones, 2017). Thus not only are white evangelicals less likely to have immigrant friends, but more than half of them, at least in the South, actually dislike such interaction with non-English speakers. Although it is not uncommon for people to feel uncomfortable around others who speak a language they do not understand, evangelicals evidenced this discomfort more so than members of other religious groups. Thus lack of personal relationships with immigrants, while no doubt an important factor, is nevertheless inadequate to fully explain the paradoxes.
Christian nationalism and ethnic affinity
Christian nationalism is associated with immigrant animus and studies show an affinity between evangelicals and Christian nationalism (McDaniel et al., 2011; Straughn and Feld, 2010). According to the Lifeway 2015 study only 20% of evangelicals see immigrants as a threat to American customs and traditions. But PRRI found that 69% of evangelicals affirm that “The American way of life needs to be protected against foreign influence” (Djupe, 2013). By isolating the views of white evangelicals Pew found that 58% believe that immigrants threaten traditional American customs and values (Drake, 2013).
Those who see traditional American values as intertwined with the Christian faith and divine favor tend to see immigrants as a threat to those values. Although regular attendance at religious services generally reduces immigrant animus, that is only the case when Christian nationalism is not also present. The fact that evangelicals tend to be supportive of Christian nationalism is yet another plausible explanation of how they arrive at their opinions on immigration (McDaniel et al., 2011; Straughn and Feld, 2010).
Such explanations would be consistent with theories of interpretive communities and critical literary theory. Research by McDaniel and Ellison confirms previous studies that “individuals do not read the [biblical] text and form beliefs about it in isolation. Instead, readings are shaped by communities of persons who share common beliefs about the nature and purpose of the text and agree on ground rules that govern their views on appropriate readings” (2008: 182). More specifically, whites, Latino/a Americans, and African Americans who all interpret the Bible literally and hold to traditional orthodox Christian theology, nevertheless tend to identify with different political parties and policies along ethnic/racial lines. Cultural identity and social norms moderate the influence of religion.
Attitudes of evangelicals not only tend to conform to the views of their ethnic affinity group, but evangelicals are also likely to attend a church that does not challenge that view. For example Brown and Brown found that whites “tend to hold more restrictive immigration policy attitudes and are considerably less likely to be members of congregations whose clergy discuss immigration and/or are involved in community efforts aimed at increasing immigrant rights” (2017: 7).
Christine Chu-Ning Kim explored in her doctoral dissertation the connection between ethnic identity, religion, and views on immigration (Kim, 2017: 79–116). Her research found that, consistent with ethnic identity and affinity theories, white evangelicals tend to reflect those views. She concludes, “If religious identity does not appear to be the dominant religious source of immigration attitudes, it is not too surprising to find, then, that cultural affinity and racial/ethnic identity seem to exert a stronger influence” (2017: 113). This would explain, in part, why evangelical leaders have difficulty influencing opinions of the rank and file. White evangelicals are torn between more progressive views of many religious leaders and the views of their ethnic affinity group which has more conservative views. Taking the example of efforts by EIT, “In trying to mobilize evangelical Christians around progressive immigration reform, the EIT is also encouraging evangelicals to adopt and act on a policy position that conflicts with another identity” (Margolis, 2018: 774).
Signs of change
Numerous studies have examined a possible leftward political shift among evangelicals that would include more liberal views on immigration. Kim’s study concludes, “With a broadened agenda, Millennial evangelicals appear to be bluer and greener as well as more compassionate, globally-minded, and tolerant, perhaps heralding a new brand of politics” (2017: 1). Although these leftward shifts are relatively small (2017: 37) they are deemed likely to continue (2017: 77), and increasing ethnic diversity among evangelicals may further advance that trend (2017: 110).
A more recent 2019 study of Protestant pastors by Lifeway showed more liberal shifts in their views on immigration. For example,
“Pastors favoring immigration reform that includes a path to citizenship have grown 12 percentage points since 2014 (70% v. 58%)”;
“Fewer pastors agree that the government has the responsibility to stop illegal immigration than in 2014 (80% v. 87%).”
Evangelical pastors are still more likely to disagree than mainline pastors (16% v. 10%) that “Christians have a responsibility to assist immigrants even if they are in the country illegally.”
Despite the common negative attitudes of evangelicals towards immigrants, it should not be overlooked that 26% of evangelical churches (compared to 33% of mainline churches) have ministries locally assisting immigrants (Lifeway, 2019). Such ministries include foreign-language worship services, English language classes, tutoring of immigrant children, and the like.
Research on the ability of clergy to influence congregants’ political opinions yields mixed results (Wallsten and Nteta, 2016: 571). But studies focused more specifically on the issue of immigration offer a hopeful note. Daniels and von der Ruhr concluded from their research “that religion does matter, and that the beliefs produced by specific religious denominations shape public opinion towards trade and immigration thereby representing an important source of resistance to deeper cultural interaction” (2005: 15). People who attend religious services are not only more likely to oppose restrictive immigration policies (Knoll, 2009), but Nteta and Wallsten found that those “who have heard a sermon, lecture, or discussion on immigration at their place of worship are significantly more likely to oppose restrictive immigration policies” (2012: 901). This is in part because such messages are often in favor of immigration reform. Their follow up study concluded furthermore that exposure to the arguments from high profile religious leaders can compel some individuals to reconsider their views on the immigration. To be more precise, we find that Methodists, Southern Baptists, and Evangelical Lutheran Church in America leaders successfully persuaded respondents who identify with these religious denominations to think differently about a path to citizenship and about the plight of undocumented immigrants. (Wallsten and Nteta, 2016: 566)
Similarly, experimental research by Michele F. Margolis (2018) found that messages by religious elites on immigration reform can influence evangelicals’ opinions, even when that information is counterattitudinal (though actions may not follow).
In other words, pastors and leaders can make a difference if they make the effort. Add to this that “68% of Evangelicals would value hearing a sermon that taught how biblical principles and examples can be applied to immigration” (Lifeway, 2015). Such findings should be of encouragement to evangelical leaders to exercise greater boldness and confidence in biblically addressing matters related to immigration and human rights.
Conclusion
Public policies and personal responses to immigration deeply impact literally millions of lives in manifold ways. The current immigration situation in the United States and elsewhere poses not only complex political dilemmas, but raises also profound ethical questions. Evangelical views on immigration have been the focus of numerous empirical studies in recent years. This study’s survey of that literature has demonstrated that many tensions evident in public debate on immigration exist also within evangelicalism. Although national-level evangelical leaders and denominations have advocated moderate positions on immigration, combining concerns for both compassion and legal immigration reform, at the grassroots level evangelicals lean towards more restrictive immigration policies. Most evangelical churches have not responded to calls to educate their congregations on matters related to immigration. Furthermore, on average, the views of most evangelicals stand in tension with evangelical theological convictions regarding human dignity, evangelism, and even biblical authority. The most likely explanations for these paradoxes may be found in the lack of personal interaction evangelicals have with immigrants and in their identification with Christian nationalism. But those findings are not conclusive. Further research will be necessary to more adequately answer these questions.
The findings reported here could potentially reinforce inaccurate stereotypes of evangelicals. Evangelical views on immigration are in fact wide-ranging and are as diverse as evangelicals themselves. Nevertheless on average these studies do raise many questions about how evangelicals arrive at their opinions, the ability of national-level evangelical leaders to influence rank-and-file evangelicals, the educational role of local leaders, and the extent to which evangelical views and responses to immigration are consistent with their theological convictions. Our hope is that the response of evangelicals to these findings are neither defensive nor dismissive, but rather to ask what measures can be taken to address these paradoxes and help their members to a more holistic and well-reasoned ethic regarding their views on immigration as well as in their personal relationships with immigrants.
Footnotes
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.
