Today’s Scripture Reading
(November 21, 2018): Numbers 35
In the United States,
California has a long history of providing sanctuary to those who are running
from some aspect of the law. In the seventies, the movement provided places of
refuge for those who were avoiding the draft and being forced to go to Vietnam.
Today, the term Sanctuary Cities has much more to do with avoidance of
immigration statutes and immigration enforcement. Sanctuary Cities are places where the illegal
immigrant can feel safe. And these safe places can be found in many of the Western States.
But the movement is not
strictly a United States phenomenon. Sanctuary cities can be found in both the United States and Canada
in North America, and Sanctuary Cities also dot Britain and the European nations.
In September 2018, the city in which I live (Edmonton, Alberta, Canada) quietly
adopted an “Access Without Fear” policy when it came to undocumented and
vulnerable people, essentially becoming another Sanctuary City.
However, the Sanctuary City
movement is not without its detractors. For many, undocumented immigrants are a
drain on resources. In a world where citizens want more than they can get, the idea that these undocumented people can have
“Access Without Fear” means that they will get even less. We are not willing to
give up our comfort and security to provide a safe place for people who we do
not believe have a right to be here.
The solution between the
proponents of Sanctuary Cities and those who oppose illegal immigration in any
form might be the ancient idea of Cities of Refuge. In a world where family,
and not the law, sought retribution for crime, Israel placed six Cities of
Refuge within its borders. The idea was not that these were places where people
could escape responsibility for their actions, but rather these were places
where they could be safe against charges of violent crime that were either
false or for a person guilty of an unintentional
death. In these places of refuge, revenge could not be sought.
But the idea of a safe sanctuary
was also not offered forever. It was a safe place to live until the crime could
be evaluated before the assembly. If the
accused were found to be guilty during the trial, then they would be turned out
of the City of Refuge so that the family could offer justice as the law might
allow. If they were found innocent or if the murder or violent crime was deemed
to be unintentional, then they were allowed to live in the City of Refuge for
the rest of their lives, safe from any retribution that the family of the slain
might want to inflict.
In our contemporary society,
Sanctuary Cities could serve a very similar purpose. For the purpose of immigration, people who enter the country illegally
could find refuge in a Sanctuary City while they were in the process of
applying for legal status to stay in the country. This refuge could be
available no matter whether that status being claimed is on the basis of providing
a valuable service to the country, or even on an application for Asylum on the
basis of Political or Religious discrimination and the danger presented to
their lives if they stay in their native lands. If they are granted access to the country, then they
are legal immigrants. In North America, the societies of the United States and Canada are based on legal immigration. We need the
world’s excess to feed our economies. But
if for whatever reason, their claims are rejected, then they can be sent home. But
until that ruling is established, a
Sanctuary City could be a safe place for the immigrant to live, and a place
where they can have “Access without Fear.”
Tomorrow’s Scripture Reading: Numbers 36
No comments:
Post a Comment