Print This Post
BOA ACTION: Change word in the first therefore paragraph from “both” to “all” by common consent; Motion to strike second paragraph approved. Motion to refer the paper to Ministry Group 4C.
GCRCC Status: Forwarded for April 2011 BOA action
GC11 ACTION: Amended and adopted
Introduced by: Mid-America Conference
Written by: Mid-America Conference
Related to Paragraph(s) #: 3221
As amended:
BE IT RESOLVED that the Free Methodist Church USA adopt the following position statement:
Issues surrounding immigrants and refugees in the United States are complex. They require solutions that halt criminal activity, provide access for legal documentation, and serve the needs of all persons, loved and created by God, who have come to the United States under a variety of circumstances. As we work to provide actions that minister to all immigrants and refugees we do so with basic underlying convictions:
- We commit to the Biblical principle of caring for the foreigners among us regardless of racial or ethnic background, country of origin, or legal status.
- We commit to acting redemptively with love rather than fear, and to reach out to meet needs as we see them.
- We commit to identifying intolerance and working to end it, as well as ending any personal inclinations to refer to individuals in less than loving terms.
- We commit to responding to this crisis in terms of the Great Commission, seeking to reach the lost whoever they may be; ministering to all, caring for all, and showing God’s grace to all people.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the position statement be distributed to all conferences, churches and entities of the denomination.
Note: this section to the BOA. BE IT RESOLVED that the Study Commission on Doctrine be charged with developing guidelines and action steps to help the FMC-USA respond to issues surrounding immigrants and refugees.”
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that these guidelines and action steps be included in the Church Leader’s Manual and made available to other general conferences of the FMC around the world.
Related posts:
I am still digesting this resolution. I want to vote yes knowing the difficulty for some immigrants becoming citizens in this country.
The comment “18 years to become a citizen” surprises me. Upon scanning the various websites, I am hearing of much shorter durations for becoming citizens among hispanic immigrants. How does this compare with the government quote in US Department of State, “Visa Bulleting for September 2010? Is the 18 years an average, or an example of one or more serious cases.
The statement “almost impossible” seems contrary to the testimonies I am finding. This doesn’t mean I disagree with the concerns voiced, but there are many hispanic testimonials who give voice to shorter terms of citizenship application. Help me understand this.
Pastor Bennett, The Department of State Visa Bulletin is published monthly and outlines which applications for permanent residency are currently being considered. To see the most current Bulletin, go to http://travel.state.gov/visa/bulletin/bulletin_1360.html. Out of the 5 visa classifications described in the Bulletin for Mexico, one has a wait of 5 years, while the other four have waits of 15 years or more.
Resolution No. 49 appears to be based more in emotion than in fact, and in no way addresses the totality of the actual problem of immigration. It appears that there also may be confusion between legal immigration and qualification for citizenship. These are two separate matters. The call for initially enforcing existing laws has merit. The use of an example of one nationality, and that without valid support of the assertions it makes, suggests that the resolution, if adopted, would confuse rather than resolve the issues involved. The language of the Resolution does not square with the rationalizations contained in the seven “whereas” clauses presented. At a minimum redrafting the rationale is needed before approval should be granted.
Thank you Susan for your clarification. I am greatly concerned about both citizenship issues and immigration issues. I do see the concerns of Harold above, and would love to see a resolution that addresses this issue. It is incredibly complex, and although families are often ripped apart, in many cases personal choices by immigrants have not been above reproach. Very few in powers that be are willing to address this issue. I appreciate the spirit of the resolution, and with some changes would consider this kind of resolution.
See Bishop Roller’s response to the Town Hall question about this subject here: http://llcomm.org/2011/04/29/bishops-answer-more-town-hall-questions.