An eye-opening look at immigration

Eva Stimson’s “The faces of immigration” (September) was an eye-opener. I got to thinking about all our undocumented ancestors who flocked to these shores in the 17th and 18th centuries. They came for the same reasons: safety, hunger, persecution, a chance at a new life. The local citizens helped them learn the way in a new world, but we called them savages, stole their land, slaughtered them by the thousands. We made ourselves the legal citizens, and forced them to adopt our ways.

How can we atone for our sins against today’s “illegal aliens”? We must expedite the process of giving them all the appropriate documents they need. We must thank them for doing the thankless jobs the rest of us don’t want to do. We should help them get an education. Where is justice and mercy?

—Claralice Hanna Wolf, Bluffton, Ohio

It’s breaking the law

I am disappointed that Presbyterians Today was used as a platform for advocating the aiding and abetting of criminal behavior. The laws of the United States established by “We the People” are clear. No one shall enter this sovereign nation without proper authorization. To do so is an act of aggression.

Breaking the law of any sovereign nation has consequences. We can have compassion for those who suffer the consequences for breaking the laws of man and of God, but that does not mean moral or physical support of their activities. Knowingly harboring such individuals in one’s home or church can be considered “aiding and abetting” criminal behavior and, as such, can be prosecuted under U.S. laws.

The people of the United States cannot absorb and support all the peoples of the world who [are poor or oppressed]. To remove our borders and even attempt to absorb all such peoples would soon collapse our economy and subject all of us to the horrors of over-population.

—Dr. Norman F. Tempel, Estes Park, Colo.

What would Calvin do?

Let’s consider an historical parallel to our immigration problem. Geneva’s population rose from 10,300 in 1537 to 21,400 in 1560 — more than double. Most of the immigrants swelling the population were from France, Italy and other places where Protestants were not accepted.

John Calvin said that not only should they be allowed to stay, but that the civil authorities were responsible for enabling them “to breathe, eat, drink and be warmed” (Institutes, III.XX.3). He insisted that they needed houses, food and work. Watchmaking was suggested since it required little material and lots of labor, and so one of Switzerland’s trademark industries started in Geneva.

May we be so caring and creative as we honor Calvin’s 500th birthday.

—Aurelia T. Fule, Santa Fe, N.M.

No right to ignore the law

Editor Eva Stimson's "Upfront" column on immigration in the September issue totally ignores the law. What gives her (or me) the right to choose which laws we will obey? Entering this country illegally is, to be repetitive, illegal. "Illegal" means against the law. Breaking the law is a crime. Commiting a crime makes one a criminal. Denying the criminality of a criminal is dishonest and just plain wrong. Even the editor of Presbyterians Today does not have the right to choose which of our laws are to be obeyed.

—Charles Calvano, Monterey, Calif.

Correction

The “Creed for Immigrants” that accompanied the article, “Faces of immigration” in the September issue of Presbyterians Today should have been credited to Jose Luis Casal, general missioner of the Presbytery of Tres Rios. The editors regret the omission.

Turn from violence

I applaud Vernon Broyles for his article “Turn from Violence” in the October issue. I, too, happened upon such a brutal fight while “channel surfing.” Such animalistic violence caused me to lose sleep and to ponder again our culture that thrives on a “survival of the fittest” mentality. Such an attitude is quite the opposite of Jesus’ spirit of equality, unconditional love and peace. Among other things, I plan to ask a friend to take down a flyer at his business that promotes “mixed martial arts.” I hope readers can also do little acts of peacemaking like this. After all, that’s what children of God are called to do.

—G. Wallace Johnson, Hickory, N.C.

Odds against small churches

As a minister only two years out of seminary, I feel I should respond to "No pastor, no problem" (June) and offer an explanation to Burt Tietje, who responded in September “Readers Write.”

While it is true that some ministers prefer to work with large congregations, many of my classmates had no choice. Leaving seminary with enormous educational debts, despite the help of subsidies/scholarships, many, especially those with families to support, could not afford to serve small churches. So they took professional positions outside the ministry, waiting for a call that they can afford to take.

I serve a small church in a small town and survive because I am single and my children are grown. Serving a small church is my passion, but even with the generous pay my congregation provides, I live paycheck to paycheck, and I owe money only on my house and my education.

I agree with Mr. Tietje. No seminary-educated minister to serve a congregation is an enormous problem. But rarely can a minister make a living serving a small church anymore.

—Tony Chambless, Ruidoso, N.M.

Chaplain Elson’s career

The name of the U. S. Senate chaplain on page 36 (Q&A) of the September issue should have been Edward L. R. Elson. Returning from WWII, where he had a distinguished ministry as an Army chaplain, Elson became pastor of the Covenant Presbyterian Church and proceeded to oversee its transition to the National Presbyterian Church and Center, and the move to the new sanctuary in northwest Washington, D.C. As Senate chaplain in 1971, he invited Wilmina Rowland Smith (Presbyterian) to be the first woman to deliver the opening prayer. He retired from the National Presbyterian Church in 1973 and from the Senate chaplaincy in February 1981.

—S. D. Chambers, Chevy Chase, Md.

Likes the changes

The format, editing and content changes are notable improvements. We read through each issue with pleasure and thankfulness. The content is so reassuring and positive, even when it deals with sensitive and controversial issues.

—G. Lloyd Rediger, Albuquerque, N.M.