Ideas Have Consequences
Worldviews shape communities, influence politics, steer economics, set social norms, and ultimately affect the well-being of both your life and your nation. Obedience to the Great Commission involves replacing false ideas with biblical truth. Together with the help of friends, our mission is to demonstrate that only biblical truth leads to flourishing lives, families, societies, and nations. This show explores the intersection of faith and culture, aiming to address pressing societal issues through a biblical lens. Ideas Have Consequences is the podcast of the Disciple Nations Alliance.
Ideas Have Consequences
Open Borders, Criminal Justice, & Seeking Shalom | Dr. Mark Moland
Episode Summary:
Conversations about crime and immigration are extremely charged today, and sincere people see these issues very differently. Why? Today, Dr. Mark Moland joins us to go beyond headlines and soundbites, unpacking the worldview assumptions shaping modern criminal justice and the immigration debates. Drawing on his experience, Mark shows how our beliefs about human nature, government, and justice shape the policies we support and how we treat our neighbors, whom we are called to love.
Hear him present a compelling biblical framework that balances compassion and truth. Affirming the God-given dignity of immigrants while recognizing the essential role of law enforcement and wise government boundaries. Mark also explores the power of community engagement, relationship-building, and the pursuit of shalom as a path toward safer, healthier, and more cohesive communities and cities. We hope this conversation will offer clarity on these critical issues and guidance for faithful Christian engagement in this tense cultural moment.
Who is Disciple Nations Alliance (DNA)? Since 1997, DNA’s mission has been to equip followers of Jesus around the globe with a biblical worldview, empowering them to build flourishing families, communities, and nations. 👉disciplenations.org
🎙️Featured Speaker:
Mark Moland joined LeTourneau University in 2015 after a 21-year career in the U.S. Coast Guard, where he led multiagency law enforcement operations, served on an international arms control delegation, and coordinated intergovernmental communications during the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. He has taught at the U.S. Coast Guard Academy and now focuses on equipping students “to work for the good of the city.” His research centers on immigration policy, mass maritime migration, and disaster response. Mark and his wife, Shana, have four children, three dogs, and enjoy books, game nights, Scouts, Awana, and serving in their local church.
📌 Recommended Links
👉 Scott’s Book: Why Social Justice is Not Biblical Justice
👉 Recommended Book: Confronting Injustice without Compromising Truth
👉 Recommended Book: Agents of Flourishing
📩 Ask us anything: info@disciplenations.org
And when Jesus is sending the disciples out, he says, you know, first in Jerusalem, then Judea, then Samaria, and then the uttermost parts of the earth. You know, so often with criminal justice, instead of saying, okay, what can we do here in our Jerusalem, we say, oh, we need to contact the uttermost parts of the earth, Washington, D.C., and have them make a decision that is imposed upon the entire nation, rather than addressing the issues that are in our own community.
Luke Allen:Hi friends, welcome back to Ideas Have Consequences. This is the podcast of the Disciple Nations Alliance. As Christians, our mission is to spread the gospel around the world to all the nations. We all agree on that. However, our mission also involves working to transform our cultures so that they increasingly reflect the truth, goodness, and beauty of God's kingdom. Tragically, the church has largely neglected the second part of her mission, and today many Christians are having little influence on their surrounding cultures. Join us on this podcast as we rediscover what it means for each of us to disciple the nations and to create Christ-honoring cultures that reflect the character of the living God. Hi guys, my name is Luke Allen. I am one of the co-hosts here on the podcast, and I am joined today by my dad and co-host as we um uh well we just finished up an excellent podcast with a fascinating new guest here on the show that came to join us with uh he was he was perfect for a lot of topics we've been wanting to talk about, but uh what we really ended up diving into were the topics of criminal justice and immigration, both fascinating topics to explore from a biblical worldview, especially in today's world. Um so we're just coming off the heels of that, and we wanted to give you guys a little bit of an idea of where that discussion went. Um, Dad, first off, thanks for joining, and then uh also could you just give us a quick overview on what uh what people are about to listen to?
Scott Allen:Yeah, thanks, Luke. You know, I thought it was a great discussion, uh very intriguing. I was excited about the opportunity to talk to um Mark. He's a professor um at Laterno College in Texas and a real expert in the area of criminal justice and political science, has a background in the military and the Coast Guard. And um I wanted to explore with him, you know, these are really major issues in especially in the United States today. Um, and I wanted to explore with him kind of this idea of the different roles biblically that we have, both as uh individuals, as families, and as the government, you know, the role of the government um in terms of our different spheres of authority. And um so on a role like immigration, for example, you can have uh immigrants in in um in your own town, let's say, and you can um work to serve them and to welcome them and uh be part of helping to settle them. At the same time, you might have somebody in your your community who is part of law enforcement and is actively working to deport. And I think a lot of Christians struggle with those two things. They on one hand, they would all get behind the deport person and neglect the care, and on the other side, they wouldn't you know be all in on the care and not neglect, but kind of vilify the Christian brother or sister who's involved in the deporting or the law enforcement. And I think that there's a room for both biblically, and how do we think about those? So I pushed in on that with Mark, and I thought his responses were good. You know, I'd let our listeners can uh have to develop their own judgment on that. But um I did appreciate his uh he put a lot of emphasis on um you know, in this needs to boil down to kind of what can you do locally in your own community and how do you bring it down to individual people and see those people uh as truly image bearers of God. Um and uh so I really appreciated his heart for that.
Luke Allen:Yeah, me too. I um this one was fascinating. I had a lot to learn coming into this and a couple of things for me just as I was sitting and learning and listening, um where I loved how he started out talking about um just the problem of sin that we all face um uh as the Bible clearly points out, we are all born into sin. Um no one is righteous, not even one. And that when it comes to this issue of uh criminal justice, it's good to keep that in mind. Uh something that the critical theorists uh do not keep in mind because they don't really believe in original sin. It's uh in fact they don't believe in uh personal sin at all. It's it's group identity, group sin, um, thanks to Marxism and and that critical theory really is behind a lot of the discussion today whether it's in the in the issue of uh criminal justice. Uh you have to have this understanding that humans have the cap capability, every one of us, to sin and to break the law and to do the wrong thing. And it's not always simply uh you we can't always simply chalk it up to it's because they're oppressed, or so on and so forth. Same thing with uh immigration. There's now this uh critical immigration theory, and it's just that same worldview being applied to something like immigration, and um you f you you lose the individual in all of that. And I liked how we started talking about what is a human, what are we created for, what is our purpose, what was uh God's original mission for us as humans, uh one of agency, one of responsibility. And um, we also talked a little bit, and I would love to talk more about this in future discussions on this topic, but just nations. We're the disciple nations alliance here, nations matter, God's created nations, God created governments. Um we talked a lot about Romans 13, which outlines the responsibilities of governments and how that's different than the responsibility of the individual Christian, how it's different than the responsibility of the church. We talked a little bit about sphere of sovereignty when it came to that. Um, and then what else did we talk about? We talked a lot about categories um and how in uh really convoluted, large, sticky, difficult subjects like immigration today, it can feel overwhelming as uh as Christians to approach something this large. And uh Mark just did a good job of helping us unpack one category at a time when it comes to something like this. There's you can't throw everyone who's in America who's not a U.S. citizen in the same camp. You can't do it. We have refugees, we have asylum seekers, we have people who have been here for generations, we have all different types of people, and you just need to have clear categories. And again, it's kind of similar with sphere of sovereignty, right? Know the category of the government, know the category of the law enforcement agent, know the category of the church, so on and so forth. So I really appreciated that. Something to listen for in today's discussion. But anyways, before before we get too much into it, let's just let's just hop into introducing Mark and into the discussion. So without further ado, off we go.
Scott Allen:Well, we're thrilled today to be joined by Professor Mark Moland. Uh Mark is a professor of criminal justice and political science at Laterno University in Texas. Uh Mark, thank you so much for being with us today.
Mark Moland:Well, thank you, Scott. I'm glad to be here.
Scott Allen:It's wonderful. Let me just give a little bit more of your background for our listeners, and then if you wanted to add anything to that, Mark, uh I I I was reading your bio this morning and I noticed right off the top that you love uh decorating cake, which I thought uh uh I thought I would just lead with that, a cake decorator.
Mark Moland:So Yeah, my wife actually tricked me into developing uh that hobby because we we met over we met overseas. I'm from California, she's from Kentucky, and we met in Geneva, Switzerland, and we were separated for most of our dating engaged time. And when we got married, her birthday was first, and she said, Dear, I've always had a decorated cake. And I so I created her a dog cake as she asked for it, and then she realized that she just needed to egg me on into higher and higher heights.
Scott Allen:And now you love decorating cakes.
Mark Moland:That's I love make I yeah, I love making the ones that look like flower baskets. Oh wow. It's just a nice, relaxing way to kind of use your hands and and and connect with other people.
Scott Allen:Well, you must have you must have a kind of a creative artistic streak there, it sounds like so. Anyways, that's great. I love that, Mark. Uh let back to your bio though. Mark uh Mark's been teaching at Laterno since 2015, but before that, uh you had a very distinguished uh 21-year career in United States Coast Guard. Um, and I was looking at some of the things you were involved in. You um you know, before uh we came on, you were talking about um the the you know the huge immigration from from Haiti and you know uh the influx of immigration and uh people put you know just literally jumping into boats and trying to get up to Florida. You were involved in that and many other uh other things. Maybe we could talk a little bit about your interesting background there. Um Mark, you have a very distinguished educational background too. Let me just uh tick a few of these things off. You have a doctor of public administration from Cal Baptist University and a Master of Uh Public Policy from Duke University. That's a small little school somewhere. I can't remember where where that one is, but anyways, Duke, yeah. And a Bachelor of Science and Government from the United States Coast Guard, and then beyond that, um, yeah, a Colson Center Fellow and a certificate of Christian and Classical Studies from Knox Theological Seminary. So that's that's a really wonderful uh educational background that you have too.
Mark Moland:So thank you. People who love to learn end up finding their ways into teaching academia at some point.
Scott Allen:Yeah, you I mean, this truly is a second career for you. Uh you know that you you were involved in yeah, just in the in the Coast Guard and in the military. Thanks for your service there. Thank you. Um and um yeah. Um and I just mentioned again, you mentioned your wife, Shauna. Um, so you're married and you have three daughters, a son, and uh three dogs. Is that still correct?
Mark Moland:That's still correct.
Scott Allen:Okay, yeah. Awesome. Well, Mark, I was excited when um when you decided to come on the podcast, or we invited you through a mutual friend. Um, this whole area that you're involved in is something that I'm really increasingly fascinated in. Um, criminal justice, issues around immigration. These are huge issues right now in the United States um and around the world, I would say, um, and very divided issues. I um I'll just tell you a quick little story for myself. Um when I was uh living in Phoenix a few years ago, um had some really close Christian friends uh and colleagues that uh I respected, very involved in the church in Phoenix. And um one of the young men, you know, he said that his passion was criminal justice reform. And I began to ask him about that, and I noticed a few things. First of all, uh he um you know he was highly critical of of police, just the whole policing. And you know, that was this around 2020, the defund police movement, and there was a narrative abroad in the culture that um police were, you know, I'm gonna paint with a broad brush, but they were kind of almost indiscriminately out there killing black and brown people, you know, in in communities. Um, and I knew that that wasn't true. I have a brother who I love and respect, who's a career police officer in Portland, Oregon, and um and so it bothered me, you know, that that narrative was abroad and um and really damaging because um, you know, it had real uh effect on police, uh policing around the country. Anyways, there was that, and then um, you know, this idea that we have kind of a prison industrial complex and the whole imprisoning of people in the United States is largely a money-making endeavor. And um he had just come back at one point from Los Angeles, he was protesting in front of the ICE facility, and just like today, you know, ICE immigration customs enforcement was viewed as a um you know, almost like a Gestapo kind of thing. And I thought, wow, you know, this this was all new to me. But of course, you know, I was seeing in the broader culture at the same time, too. You know, I I remember watching a documentary that had a profound impact on me called Seattle is dying. And it was looking specifically at the homeless situation in Seattle. And it was done by a local TV station. They did an outstanding job. They interviewed everybody that touched the homeless situation there, business owners, the city council members, police, the homeless people themselves really wanted to get a full perspective. But the saddest part to me was the part where they were interviewing police officers in Seattle who this one guy retired, he just couldn't take it anymore because he had arrested um, you know, this one criminal, I would say, homeless person, you know, who was uh, you know, the law. I mean it's like fifty times he had been arrested. And every time, you know, he there wasn't the district attorney, there just wasn't any prosecution, he was immediately released back onto the street. And I thought something is really wrong. And um I know that for a lot of us here in the United States, we are familiar now with uh this really uh just horrific case that we saw in Charlotte, North Carolina, with that young um uh Ukrainian immigrant uh Irina Zarutska, I'm not sure pronouncing her name right, who was brutally murdered on the train again by a gentleman named De Carlos Brown, who had been also uh arrested multiple times, but also not prosecuted and can you know was released back onto the streets. Um I there's a worldview behind this, and I know that it's not just out there in the quote unquote secular world, it's come into the church. A lot of Christians uh like my friend buy into this idea of criminal justice reform with those attitudes behind it. Um and there's a lot more I could say, but I I just wanted to kind of get your thoughts, Mark, on what's happening with that. What's going on in the culture, what's behind that? It seems to me quite destructive. And um, and then I'd like to hear too your thoughts on uh, you know, just what uh these are broad questions, but what what would a truly biblical approach to this area of criminal justice look like, begin to look like? I know that's a huge question, but would love your thoughts on that.
Mark Moland:Yeah, it's a complicated question, and it's one that we have a hard time grappling with. Um we need to um really think through what does it mean to do justice in our in our communities. You know, when we look at, you know, why do we have people who come up and again and again come up aren't are either chosen not to prosecute or are released on light sentences. You know, what's the core of that? Well, you know, as you mentioned, it it's a worldview issue. You come down to this question of why do people commit crimes? And the way you answer that question really shapes how you do law enforcement, how you shape laws around crime. If you think people are criminals because they are society outcasts, if it's because they don't have enough education, it's because they don't have access to enough resources, uh, then you're having this external problem and the person is only responding uh because that's all they can do. But if you see that it's an internal problem, because of sin, it needs an external solution. It needs someone to come up and take and externally correct that internal problem. How do you change a person's heart? And when you're thinking about, okay, what do I do with this person in front of me? If your presupposition is, hey, this individual is of a certain ethnic group, of a certain economic class, of a certain level of education, and you put it through that filter and say, oh, it's probably because they didn't have enough opportunity or whatnot, you're going to execute justice differently than if you say, hey, this person made a distinct choice in order to uh do this crime.
Scott Allen:If something has led them to you, if I could just cut you off just briefly there, Mark, because I I think you're you're putting your finger right exactly on what I was kind of coming to as well. It's is um again, it's this idea that a a lot of of criminal activity, and I think especially with this um this kind of neo-Marxist idea that we we separate kind of the world into oppressors and oppressed, and on one side of that line you have LGBTQ, people of brown and black skin, and things like that. Um the reason that criminal rates are high among those people, let's say, you know, particularly the black community, tragically, uh today, anyways, uh it is it has to do with um the um the the act of the oppressors, you know, kind of pushing them down, kind of it and so there's a lack of, like you say, a lack of agency, a sense that of or of responsibility. Um and I I don't mean to minimize that. There there's certainly there is oppression in our fallen world, but this idea exactly like you're saying of how you see them, are they prime are you see them primarily as people that are generally good, but the system is against them, it's stacked against them, and that's why their you know, you know, their rates of imprisonment or whatever it is are higher than the average population or something like that.
Mark Moland:Yeah, and and and with that observation, if you flip it around, if people are committing crimes because of the oppression or because of the system or because this is something that's just done to them, I think the logical question to ask is why are there not more people committing crimes? Why are there not more people who are in that same in those same situations committing crimes? And it's because you know there is that agency aspect. There is uh there's an aspect of agency socialization, how your uh how your community is telling you or encouraging you to deal with this internal struggle that you have. Um, because they can push you in one way or the other. When uh I think of how do we respond biblically to the problems of criminal justice, um, I immediately go to Jeremiah's letter to the exiles, where he has this group of people who you could say are easily say are oppressed because they've been exiled from their country, they're being held in a foreign land, they're second-class citizens there. Uh their natural instincts are just to sit there and feel sorry for themselves. They hang their harps by the river, as the psalmist said. Um but Jeremiah says, no, while you're here, build houses, plant gardens, get married, have kids, and work for the good of the community to which you're called for in its good, you will find your good. And that word that I said is good in some translations is peace, sometimes is welfare. The root Hebrew word there is shalom. Um, and Neil Planaga, a theologian wrestling with this idea of shalom, described it as the way things ought to be. And we really try to define what shalom is, and we think about okay, how did Jesus summarize the law? Well, it's love God and love your neighbor as yourself. And so we've got these three loves in there: the love of self, love of neighbor, and love of God. And as we're approaching the community and thinking through, you know, how do we have a good, a safe, a welcoming community, um love of God needs to be present. Love of neighbor and love of self needs to be present. And so we need to be working in all of those, in all of those areas. When I think of law enforcement in particular, um, I see law enforcement as a shalom-seeking profession. Because it's not enough to just take, quote, take crime out of the city. Police officers also serve as a way of building bridges in communities, trying to connect people one to another to help them feel safe so their own community can flourish.
Luke Allen:Hi, friends, I'd like to tell you about our newest free online discipleship training course that we offer here at the Disciple Nations Alliance, called The Grand Design: Rediscovering What It Means to Be Human, Both Male and Female, Made in the Image of God. Throughout the ages, cultures have pivoted between two understandings of the sexes. Men and women are equal, and therefore they are the same or interchangeable, or men and women are different, and those differences are harmfully exploited to falsely claim that some people are superior to others. But what if there was another option? What if the true biblical understanding rooted in the Trinity provided a foundation and a vision for the sexes, where unity and equality is possible without uniformity, and where differences and diversity between men and women is celebrated without superiority? In an age where views about men and women have divided the church and culture, the Grand Design Course offers an opportunity for everyone to discover with fresh insights all that it means to be made in the image of God, male and female. To sign up for this free video training course, go to quorumdale.com, or you can learn more on this episode's page, which is linked in the show notes.
Scott Allen:Could you also talk, Mark? I think there's a lot of confusion when it comes to criminal justice and just justice in general. Um there's confusion about uh roles and um there's a distinct role for, let's say, the individual Christian or the church perhaps, and then there's a role for the government. You know, Paul talks about this in is it Romans chapter eight? I f I should I should have this right off the top of my head, but he talks about the role of the state, of the government as a God ordained authority and uh probably at the very top of its job description is justice that bears the sword for that reason. And you know, he basically says that um um, you know, if you are doing good, you don't have any reason to fear, but if you are committing crimes, you know, you should be worried because you're, you know there's a reason why the government, you know, the the state, if you will, civil authorities bear the sword, so to speak. And uh I wonder if you could just talk a little bit about those differences. Those are both biblical ideas. Um but I think I see a lot of times people conflating them, you know, um, where well they they conflate it this way. They say what's meant for the individual or the church in terms of a particularly maybe a compassionate approach um is also the role, should be the role of the government. Um any thoughts on that? Or do you want to um elaborate a little on that?
Mark Moland:Yeah, it it's interesting. We have kind of collapsed everything into the government's job these days. We want the government to have a safe community, but also to strengthen the community, also to uh make sure the roads are repaired, also make sure our students are educated. Uh in um you just think back in political philosophy where Jean-Jacques Rousseau said, you know, man is free everywhere he's in chains, and his vision of true freedom was casting off everything in society, casting off the church, casting off the family, and basically being free under the government's sway. And so the government can make you free, in essence. Uh, contrast that with um Abram Kuyper, who was a Dutch theologian in the late 1800s, early 1900s. But he was involved, not only he was a pastor and a theologian, he was in founded a university, he ran a newspaper, he founded a political party, he was uh prime minister at one point in his political career. Because he said, you know, the church should be involved in every aspect of life. But when it came to the way society was organized, he talked about this idea of sphere sovereignty, where education was its own sphere, the family was a sphere, the church was a sphere, um, the government and the criminal justice was a sphere, and that the government had certain places they're involved, the community had places they were involved, the family had places, the church had places they're involved. Um, but at no point should the government take over all of those spheres and rule them. And I think we've lost that. You know, we look at you know criminal justice situations, you know, like the um the issue of uh Arena's murder, uh we often see just the narrow picture of her being attacked on the video, but the whole video, the whole picture shows, I think it's four other people sitting within an arm's reach, all completely fixated on their phones, with headphones on, completely drowning out the world around them. You know, this suggests it's not just an issue of you know this man versus this woman. This is a whole community challenge that we have here. People not awake and aware to uh what's going on in arm's reach from them, uh people possibly not even caring about what's happening until it's too late. Uh you know, we uh we often look, okay, we have a problem, how do we fix it? You know, should we go to the government? Should we march all the way to what if I'm in Longview, Texas, if if there's something wrong in our community, uh so often the temptation of people say, well, let's talk to our congressman, let's write it, you know, write to the president, let's get something fixed. When it's possibly something we can do right here in our own community, where it's something that we could come together if we have strong relationships in our own community and address it together. You know, it's interesting when I think about how the church operates, uh we look and when Jesus is sending uh disciples out to go evangelize the world, he says, you know, first in Judea, Jerusalem, then Judea, then Samaria, and then the uttermost parts of the earth. I mean, you're evangelizing and discipling broader and broader groups of people until you're extending to the greater extent of the earth. You know, so often with criminal justice, instead of saying, okay, what can we do here in our Jerusalem, we say, oh, we need to contact the uttermost parts of the earth, Washington, D.C., and have them make a decision that is imposed upon the entire nation rather than addressing the issues that are in our own community.
Scott Allen:Yeah, yeah. Yeah, no, I I think that um you mentioned Abraham Kuyper's sphere of sovereignty. I just think that's very biblical. I think that uh, you know, I appreciate him a lot. I've been influenced by him a lot. But as I look at his, you know, what he's saying there, I think, yeah, it's very biblical. God ordains certain authorities, and um, they need to respect that realm of authority one to another. Um, so for example, the parents have authority in the home, especially when it comes to raising of children, educating of children. Um, we have to be careful if the state or even the church comes in and says, hey, we'll take that job from you. Don't worry, we got that covered, you know. Um that's not what, you know, that's not the way God established it. And uh and yet you're right. I think you're exactly right on your analysis that right now we're at a time when the government is is the one that's kind of broadly, its tentacles are kind of reaching out into every area, and uh, Christians and other people besides are are kind of saying, fine, you you know, go ahead, take care of that. You know, we talk a lot about care for the poor in a community. Yeah. Um, that's become a a central role for the government as well through you know these this our massive welfare and entitlement state. Uh it wasn't always that way. If you go back to early America, the primary job of caring for the poor in a community was r rested with families first and foremost, their, you know, their own family members, and then secondly with the with local churches who had a um a responsibility to care for the poor. It wasn't on the job description of the government. Uh the government's job description was uh, you know, the Bible, I think, is quite it's it's pretty narrow. It's it's keeping order, you know, it's upholding justice so that there can be, so that people can exercise, you know, their freedoms and their rights and and thrive and flourish to the best of their ability. You can't just have, you know, in a fallen world, you're gonna have crime run amok, you know, without without that, you know.
Mark Moland:So and when we ask government to do things, you we have to remember that the higher, the farther you get away from the local community, the more abstract it's gonna be. Because you're gonna have to apply it to 330 million people. And so the rules get abstract, the enforcement gets even more abstract, you know. As you know, as far as the government's concerned, to a certain extent, we're all numbers because that's the only way you manage 330 people. And you know, people appeal their cases and they go, Oh, I'm not treated fairly by the government. Well, they don't treat people fairly, they treat, they manage cases. You know, uh one area of my my study in public administration is bureaucracy. And if you go back to the classical study of what the ideal bureaucracy is, the government agency that most exemplifies the perfect bureaucracy is the DMV. And you ask anyone, universally hate it. It's like, well, they don't treat me as a person. They I have to sit through lines, I have to do forms. Yes, that's exactly how a bureaucracy should work because you're treating everyone fairly and as efficiently as possible. That's the only way to manage such a large group. You know, you know, contrast that when you know Moses is trying to lead all of Israel and he is just absolutely overwhelmed. His father in law comes in and says, What you need to do is to appoint people at lower and lower levels of the nation in order to hear the cases so they can hear the cases in their community. And only the most important ones come on to you.
Scott Allen:That is such an important principle that we see there from scripture. Um, this kind of decentralizing and devolving of authority downwards, this this delegating of authority. I just think it's there's two directions you can go with that. You know, in a totalitarian uh system, it all de uh it devolves upward, right? There's only at the end of the day, one or person or group, right, that that has all authority, and everyone else becomes kind of you know utterly dependent or without any kind of agency. The other direction is this delegating of authority downwards. And that's exactly what you were describing there in that situation with Moses. Um, you need to delegate authority downwards. And somebody reminded me that that didn't start with that Moses there, that started with God Himself in the beginning, you know, in creation. Um, God delegates authority to us, to human beings, to have a sphere of of dominion, of, you know, you will, you know, you will rule over creation under my ultimate authority uh and accountable to me, but you know, I'm going to delegate authority to you. And I I know enough countries around the world where that, you know, this kind of uh generous, if you will, kind of delegation of authority and trust is just doesn't exist. And yet it seems to me a very central biblical and very powerful biblical idea. And the most basic form of that authority is this is one we I think we take for granted so often, which is just authority or governance over ourselves, or what the Bible calls self-government or self-control. Um, you know, uh I've uh you know, different people, different uh uh political theorists have said things like, you know, you can't govern a nation unless you can govern a s govern a city, and you can't govern a city unless you can govern a family, and you can't govern a family unless you can govern yourself. I mean, something like that. And um uh you know, I think there's a lot of a lot of truth to that. That that's kind of the biblical idea. And that yet this idea, uh uh Mark, that the government should be you know, where the authority and the power and the control all kind of uh devolves upwards to to to a centralized form of government. Um I do think I've seen in recent years how that did kind of come about at the turn of the cent turn of the last century um you it's especially uh associated with uh President Wilson who felt like you know, the United States was so big, so complex uh you know, at that point that um it really uh required a a highly educated elite, essentially, to kind of run things. And um so that was the beginning of the bureaucratic state, um, you know, kind of run by the best and the brightest, so to speak. And so I don't know, those are just some reflections on what you were just talking about there.
Mark Moland:Yeah, it it's it's really fascinating because on the one hand, we we want government to be in charge of everything, but on the other hand, we want our own local input. You know, what's what was really fascinating uh during Deepwater Horizon, the large oil spill in in the Gulf in 2010.
Scott Allen:Yes.
Mark Moland:Impacting states. Under U.S. law, the federal government is responsible for clean uh making sure that the oil spills are cleaned up by the responsible party. In this case, it was BP, and the federal government's in charge. The problem is the government only know the federal government only knows so much about the coastal waters, the areas, the people who are there, the resources that are available. So you have to bring in lower and lower levels of government. So you have to rely on the locals in order to do the response because they're the ones who know the situation on the ground.
Scott Allen:They know the detail. That's right.
Mark Moland:And that's that problem is if we have one policy for the entire nation in certain areas, you don't really know in Washington DC how it's going to impact somebody in you know, Longview, Texas, or Bayou, Labatchery, Louisiana. Sometimes you need that uniformity. Security is one of those areas, national security is one of those areas where you need uniformity, areas where you need to consistently do things the same way. But in other areas, there is a local context, local relationships that need to be accounted for in making those decisions.
Scott Allen:Absolutely. And I think our founding fathers established the United States based on that, you know, that people needed to self-govern and then govern in local communities. And, you know, they set up a system of federal government that was pretty small and contained in the Constitution for that very reason. They distrusted too much power, and they also understood that you know these are local, this is an area of local authority and control. I saw this um in a book I read many years ago that had a big influence on me called The Tragedy of American Compassion by Marvin Olasky, the former editor of World Magazine. And um he was looking at the the history of poverty fighting in the United States and how it started out at a very local level by churches who knew the poor themselves, because there's a lot of causes of poverty, just like there is of crime, like you were saying. Um it's complicated, it's not it's not a simple thing. Um sometimes people are they're engaged in they're poor because of ac actions like just alcoholism and just giving them money isn't gonna solve solve the problem, you know, and so local people who knew these people could do a much better job at kind of actually diagnosing the correct problem and helping them. And then of course, over the years, um we developed systems of poverty um fighting that that became much more centralized, and the the the poor themselves became, like you said, completely depersonalized, just numbers on a page. And I think that's really why it why it's largely failed, um, because you cannot deal with that at that that kind of high level.
Mark Moland:So well, and you know, we make these changes in like say welfare policy, and say we argue that, for example, it used to be you received a check, which then you had to keep you now had to cash. Now you receive a debit card, which looks like in the other debit card. And the argument is, oh, this is more this is more humane because they don't have to admit that they're uh using government funds, it's much more discreet. But on the other hand, when you have to receive money directly from somebody, you can look them in the eye and you can you can see the person there and you can have that connection. You know, you can speak to them if they feel shame because they're having to take it, you can speak to them in your shame. You can connect them with hope. Now, if you're just receiving a card in the mail, uh it's completely lacking that interpersonal accountability.
Scott Allen:No, and it it's also very dehumanizing, Mark, you know, because um, you know, not only is there a lack of or you know, a lack of shame, but biblically, I think when we look at the human person, you know, so much of our dignity is found in the fact that we are image bearers of God and we're we're here on this world, in this world to work and to make things better and to provide for people, right? To provide for our families. And there's such dignity that comes with that, you know, that I'm to work, I'm to provide. I remember reading the um biography of our current vice president J.D. Vance, and he grew up in a really impoverished community in Appalachia, and uh he finally got his first job at a Taco Bell, and he he bought a meal for his family, and he it just changed his life because of the dignity that that brought him, that he could pay for that simple meal at Taco Bell. And this whole depersonalizing, you know, uh we take away the shame and we take away you should feel shame uh that somebody else essentially is treating you like an animal is what they're doing, you know. We'll just feed you or whatever it is. You don't need to feel bad about that. But we're not animals, we're human beings, and uh there should be a shame and that I'm not functioning as I should as a human being, and there's also dignity that comes with that. Um we we're kind of drifting a little ways away from crime and and immigration, but I think these are these are topics that overlap with that, don't they?
Mark Moland:Oh, absolutely they do. Because when we uh take criminals or immigrants and just put them as, oh, they're this other, there's they're just things that need to be managed, you know, we lose the humanity there as well.
Scott Allen:Exactly. Yeah.
Mark Moland:You know, being able to uh look someone in the eye in prosecuting a crime, being able to see that maybe there were extenuating circumstances and seeing the humanity by this person who made a horrible choice, moral choice, but you know, there's a deep conflict. You can s you can see maybe they've been numbed out because of life's circumstances, or they're actually bearing the weight of that guilt and they're wanting to deal with that guilt, they're wanting to find forgiveness, they're wanting to find bring restitution for what that they have done. The more that we can see people, the more that we can see them in the context of our community and in the relationships that are uh that are naturally around us, you know, the more we can eventually bring a closer, safer community together.
Scott Allen:Yes. I think that's very, very deeply, those are deep biblical ideas that should form the structuring of our societies and cultures, and I think they when they're put into practice are very positive, very healthy, you know, for the community. Um I'd like to uh Luke bring you in. I know you've got questions here too. Um and we can we can shift a little bit to uh the topic of immigration or go any direction you want.
Luke Allen:So Yeah, thanks, Ted. I'm I'm just really enjoying sitting and listening. I wasn't I wasn't exactly uh sure which direction we would go right at the beginning there, and uh I like where it went. That was that was fascinating. I think you need to set that as the the stage before talking about any issue that has to do with hurting people is just understand who people are and w w what we are created to do. You know, understanding that we're image bearers of God, understanding that we've been given agency in Genesis two and understanding uh how that agency needs to be worked out in ourselves first and then in the people closest around us and so on and so forth, and the other spheres. And just just seeing the humanity as is so important. The um the call to love our neighbors, right? It's uh as Jesus makes clear, our neighbor is everyone. Um, but just that word neighbor obviously brings to mind connotations of your immediate next door house that you live next to, right? Your next door neighbor or your neighborhood. And um just that idea of people that you get to know on a uh more personal level because you live life with them basis, yeah. Is is those are the people that you can love the best, which makes total sense. Um, but I I just think you have to start there in any of these discussions. Um I don't exactly know how to trans how to move this discussion into an area like immigration, as that's just a whole nother huge topic, but um maybe you guys can make that transition better than I can.
Mark Moland:Well, you know, one of the things that of thinking about people, uh I like the way you said that. You said that, Luke, about seeing people as they are and and bringing these strands together. Um one of the uh the recent issues that have made uh national and international news about immigration uh came out of the presidential debate uh last October when uh we're talking about Springfield, Ohio, and President Trump famously devolved his position down to the lines that you know they're eating dogs and cats. Uh and so, of course, the the press immediately went out, and the whole debate about the issue was did they eat animals or did they not? Uh Germany.
Scott Allen:Remind me of that. What these were immigrants from where?
Mark Moland:They were immigrants from Haiti.
Scott Allen:Haiti, okay, that's right.
Mark Moland:And they were in Springfield, Ohio. The fascinating thing about how these issues all come together is looking in the details of what was happening in Springfield, Ohio, and why this started coming to national level attention in the presidential debate. The um the specific dogs and cats issues came up because a very frustrated woman exaggerated as she was giving her testimony before a city council. And that happened to be the one talking point that was picked up by President Trump.
Scott Allen:Oh, that's interesting. That's funny. Yeah. But on that, Marcus, I recall that, I mean, we did go through under President Biden this kind of unprecedented just wave of immigration that was um, you know, uh I again I don't think it's been there, there isn't a precedent for it in our history, just the sheer numbers. And and frankly, that it was it seemed to be a coordinated effort on the part of our government, the United Nations, and others to do it. You know, it wasn't just, oh, these people are happening to come up to the border and go across it and we're gonna be lax on the border. There was this, there was this direct positive kind of let's work through different channels to create pathways to bring people into the country, not just even on foot, but through air or whatever it whatever ways. Um so the and then the way that that hit local communities like Springfield, Ohio, is that all of a sudden you had this massive influx of people from a very different culture like Haiti that are now living next door to you. And um, you know, that that that was a reality we all were just kind of living through in a lot of communities, you know.
Mark Moland:Yeah, and that's that's exactly what was happening there, is because we had these broadest possible interpretation of refugee policy, broadest possible interpretation of asking for asylum in this country, um, broadest possible use of what's called temporary protected status. And Haitians in particular, uh, the Biden administration said, look, there's there's crises in Haiti, so if Haitians come to the United States via land, um then they'll be temporary protected status. When you have a situation like that, that encourages people to enter illegally. And Springfield, Ohio, before the mass immigration was about 60,000 people. And then from what we can piece together from journalists, uh, what happened is there were there were jobs available, there were temp agencies there that had uh people who spoke Creole, and some Haitians settled there, and they sent word back to their friends and relatives who were migrating and said, Hey, Springfield, Ohio is a place where you can come and get a job and settle. Over a very short period of time, 15,000 Haitians came and settled in the town, which uh was about a 25% increase in overall population.
Scott Allen:Yeah, exactly. I mean, so that that was, you know, and it didn't seem to me that there was much thought in terms of what will that mean to a town like Springfield on the part of people that were facilitating this. And by the way, I'd love your thoughts on like you you mentioned this changing of the way that the policy on refugees, for example, was uh administered to the broadest possible interpretation. That actually kind of makes me a bit angry because it seems to me that it was abused. In other words, there really is a reason to have a a refugee policy to protect people that are truly vulnerable. And yet when you abuse that and it just becomes kind of an open door for almost anybody, and they just come up and say, I'm a I'm a refugee and we we won't check on that, then true refugees. I'm thinking of Nigerians today who are being really persecuted and they're cr Nigerian Christians, for example. Um, they actually had a harder time, I think, claiming refugee status. Yeah. Um any thoughts on that? Just this kind of abuse of these important categories. It seems to me that our immigration system is just really woefully broken and kind of intentionally so, just because there's people that benefit from it being broken. I'd love your thoughts on that.
Mark Moland:Yeah, it it it's broken partially because you need Congress to make some structural changes in order to address the immigration issue. And whether you are in the right or left in Congress, actually addressing the issue is not a winning uh campaign slogan. Um because one side they they both uh benefit from being able to say, hey, if you vote for me, I will stand on this position related to immigration. Uh but when it comes to like refugee, all the there's a lot of terms that involved that we just kind of throw about loosely. Uh if um if someone is a refugee, they're fleeing their home or country due to a well-founded fear of persecution based upon their race, religion, creed, or national origin. And that's a definition that was established in the Geneva Convention after World War II when we're trying to grapple with how do we deal with the reality of the Holocaust. Uh now, a subset of that is someone called an asylum seeker. And that is uh if you're a refugee, you have fled your country and you are petitioning to be taken to a third country for safekeeping until you can return to safely to your nation of origin. An asylum seeker is someone who literally shown up on your doorstep. Uh, they have shown up at the border, they have shown up at an embassy, they have shown up on uh even a naval ship and said, please, please let me in uh if uh I'm fleeing because of the of I'm one of these categories, if you send me back, I'm gonna die. And that's the point where we historically have done an assessment of whether or not they meet each of those criteria for being considered a refugee or asylum seeker. Uh, if you're a refugee and you fled to another country, uh the United Nations High Commissioner of Refugees creates a camp, they administer it, and then they work with the national government to do resettlement. And they work with the United States of the State Department and Department of Health and Human Services for refugees. For asylum seekers, the decisions made at the border, and then what structurally should happen is you're detained until you can have a hearing. The problem is there are so few immigration judges to do the hearings, and there's such long waiting periods that most of our detention facilities are filled, and so we usually just parole people into the community. And that can be a pathway for long, undeterred uh entry into the United States. Uh, my my master's thesis when I was at Duke was looking at the smuggling of uh Chinese migrants into the into the United States through the U.S. Virgin Islands. And the question that was animating it is why were they choosing to go to the U.S. Virgin Islands when the West Coast of the United States would make much more sense? And the other piece of the puzzle is that when they were entering the Virgin Islands, they usually showed up at uh nice resorts with their hands in the air shouting police asylum. When they were interviewed, uh, these uh young men of working age almost unanimously said, I am here fleeing the one child policy in China. And so you start digging into these cases and say, okay, why are you fleeing the one child policy? Yes. And they would say, Oh, I have to win.
Scott Allen:I'm having a hard time making sense of that. Yeah.
Mark Moland:Yes. That's the key. This is where migration, this is where immigration law and refugee status doesn't always make sense. They were asking them to come into the United States uh as asylum seekers, fleeing the one-child policy because Congress, in a well-meaning attempt to address uh the one one child policy, put a addition to the refugee policy saying fleeing this policy is a basis for asylum in the United States. They never specified that it was women carrying children wanting to uh to flee this.
Scott Allen:No, okay, no brother, okay.
Mark Moland:So the courts said, hey, this this is a basis under law, so we can let them in. Or they would uh ICE's predecessor would then uh take them and say, okay, well, we don't have any room under detention facilities. The U.S. Virgin Islands doesn't have any um uh any uh legal reason to keep you here, so we will take you to Florida or to one of our other uh places in the United States and we'll parole you into the United States. And so this was becoming a a conduit of for people entering the United States through uh through that policy at the time. This is where immigration policy and asylum policy don't always make sense. You know, we have clear categories, but then we make exceptions and uh then we don't have the ability to hear all of the cases, and so we just parole people into the community and we'll give them temporary protected status if they they meet certain criteria. Uh so we have a policy that's kind of grown from it, but it's hard to say no, and to one extent because people see it and say, Oh, you're not being compassionate because these people have a real felt danger of going back. You know, you know, based upon the original definitions of refugee, uh, if you have a situation where there's gang violence in your country, uh, that shouldn't be a basis for truly being considered a refugee or an asylum seeker. However, you know, the Biden administration broadly expanded the definition to include that type of violence as a basis for asylum. Rather than admitting, you know, two or three people into that category, you ended up admitting thousands of people who may or may not have actually been fleeing, but they see this as an opportunity to claim and then have a future, an uncertain future adjudication of the hearing, but have access to the United States in the meantime.
Scott Allen:Right, right. What what do you make of what's happening now? We've we've got, you know, just the 180-degree reversal of what President Biden was doing now with President Trump. Um I mean, he's really secured the border, which has been kind of remarkable to see how quickly that could be done. But now, of course, there's the big um push to um you know, to res what what's the word I'm looking for to resettle people back in their homelands that that came here illegally during the Biden administration. Um and I know that this gets uh challenging for a lot of Christians. I was just in Phoenix recently and talking to a friend of mine who, you know, those so much of our blue collar work is now being done by people that are here not legally, you know, or they're in that kind of you know, you know, kind of status where, you know, they maybe missed their hearing and you know, anyways, I I but and then some have been here for many, many years now, right? But they're still here illegally. And um you know the the the question came up on the part of my friend, do I put do I work to protect that person, you know, from being you know sent back even because they've been here for many years? Um you know, uh you know, their life is really here. Um what what advice do you have for people like that? Because this is a very personal issue for a lot of a lot of a lot of people. I mean well, I I've got my thought, but I'd I'd like to hear yours first and then kind of because I'm wrestling with this myself, Mark. Yeah.
Mark Moland:Yeah, and I I'm wrestling with that also, because uh when we look at you this issue of the ICE deportations, you know, on the one hand, there are those who have come illegally and uh have been here illegally for an extended period of time who are being deported. There's others who have overstayed a visa and it's or sometimes they just failed to renew a visa or didn't renew it on time and then decided, well, it's never enforced, so I'm I'm not gonna deal with it. But they've been living longstanding. I almost see those as two different categories, although the the administration categorizes them the same, apparently, from what we're hearing, at least through the news about how it's being enforced. Um the best approach to this, this policy-wise, that I think I've ever seen a politician try to cobble together was about 2000, I think it's 2007 or 2008. And then Congressman Mike Pence proposed uh this idea about people who are in the United States who are here illegally but want to normalize their status. And this the scheme that he recommended is that if they have been living in the United States of a clean record other than the illegal entry, and they there would be a path to citizenship, but it involved going back to their country of origin and then registering through a uh US, or they I think they called them welcome centers, if I remember right. And then they would uh have expedited return to the United States in a now legalized manner. What as a Christian I saw attractive about that approach is one, it required the acknowledgement of the wrong. In essence, there was kind of this act of repentance about going back to your country, but then there's also this mercy of the United States recognizing, hey, even though you're here legally, you know, you did live and become an active member of the community, uh, you're living in an honorable way, so we want to give you that access. And so it wasn't a, hey, we're just going to normalize you being here. There was this intentional act by the individual who was on the um in the illegal status to acknowledge that and then seek to uh become in the legal status. And I found that was probably one of the best attempts at an approach to address those who have been here a long time and have lived in accordance with the law, other than their their initial entry, and and really try to give them a pathway to to citizenship.
Scott Allen:Yeah, it's tricky though, because um when when I hear you describe that, uh there is a part of that that seems good but um and cu humane, you know, recognizing that these people have been here for a long time, have built lives here in the United States and uh careers. Um at the same time, you know, i if they were to go back and then go through kind of an expedited process where they were given kind of favored status to get back in, it seems to me that would be unjust to people that didn't come in illegally in the first place. And there's still a lot of those people that are trying to come here legally. So essentially, you know, the people uh that uh are harmed in that scheme are the people who didn't break the law in the first place, which just doesn't seem just or right to me.
Mark Moland:Yeah, you know, it's uh I I think it was Peter Kraft who made the observation that what is gray but a mixing of black and white. Uh-huh. And and we've we've had so many black and white issues mixed over time that we have this very amorphous situation that we need to try to figure out what the best way to address it is.
Scott Allen:Yeah, go back and kind of fix something that's very broken now, exactly.
Mark Moland:And any solution to this is going to be rife of controversy and it's going to be difficult. And I think that's what is making it so difficult with these deportations, is because the illegal immigration had gone on for so long, there had not been any significant attempt at enforcement. Uh, any this enforcement uh right now is seen as like, oh my goodness, we've never seen anything like this before because we haven't. And we're gra we're grappling with the implications because people have become such parts of the community. Um, I um I think of it from that perceptive we're talking about, you know, the whole community being involved. Um, what it seems like is people run to the media and say, Oh, I want to tell the story about this individual.
Luke Allen:Yeah.
Mark Moland:Imagine if if whole communities came around individuals and said, Well, wait, please, let's not deport this, please release this person. If an entire community or a large number of people or entire churches rose up and said, Hey, um, please reconsider and release this person because they've done this, this, and this, and this in the community. This is what they have done. Um, you know, this this is how they're such an integral part of this community. Please recon, you know, please, on the basis of justice, please reconsider. Um, you know, we're not seeing that though. Part of that's because our society is so broken up and we don't know each other, and we don't have that network of connections that are willing to are able to step forward as a group.
Scott Allen:Yeah, yeah. Mark, I was I was um I've been involved with different refugees just in a in a personal way. Our family has Luke and you know, my wife, um, refugees from Afghanistan and um Croatia, you know, many years ago. We we've we have refugee friends uh from Iran. Um so it's an area that I have a heart for. And uh I've been even um involved in leadership with a ministry in Phoenix that was uh doing good work, you know, to try to care, provide care for um uh and support for you know the needs that immigrants have in the United States. And I always felt, you know, that that was important biblically. You know, there's a lot of Bible verses that talk about um, you know, just we should be kind of concerned and caring for the immigrant among us. Absolutely. But I also felt like the, again, this gets to the separation of the roles, right? There's a role for the individual in the church related to this, but there's a role for the government. It's not the same. The role for the government, in my view, is to enforce the border, right? To have the policy and enforce the border and to keep order, you know, um, which it hasn't been doing. The organization that I was working for, that however, you know, not only was it uh, you know, please let's be involved together and working as a community to care for the needs of the immigrants in our community, which I was fully on board with, but it then it drifted over into policy, and we need to kind of advocate for open borders type policies. And I was like not okay with that, you know. Um, but I also felt like it was I was kind of unusual in that, where you kind of got two groups of Christians almost, I'm gonna paint with a broad brushstroke, you know, one that wants a secure border, deport the immigrants, and and that, you know, even kind of caring for them is seen as problematic. And on the other side, it's care for the immigrants, be compassionate, love them. And then that also means have an open border, um, you know, or advocate for that kind of open border policy, which I'm not in favor of. So it seems to me just there's confusion in the church on this. Again, can you speak to the two roles, you know, that that we have? Um, because we're living with people now that are here illegally. You know, what our role isn't to enforce the law as as citizens. That's not my role. I'm not gonna arrest people. I'm not gonna deport people. It's not my job. But I can care for them if there's a need, you know, they're uh provide some help or support. So any thoughts on that?
Mark Moland:Just for the last few years. Uh the way refugee resettlement worked was a deeply personal way that involved often involved the church and the community. Uh, because it would they the US government would work with refugee resettling organizations, uh like Christian organizations like Lutheran uh refugee services, uh, Catholic World Services, and World Relief. They'd work directly with communities and they'd work directly with churches and other organizations of the community to help intentionally settle refugees in the community. When I uh lived in North Carolina at Duke, uh my church was involved in helping uh refugees from Vietnam uh resettle in the community. And it was a wonderful way to meet and welcome people who had gone through an extensive process and had been longing to be resettled in the United States or somewhere else that was safe for a new home, to connect them, give them opportunities to become part of the community, to share with them our language, share with them our culture, and be part of that welcome. And that's really where the church thrives, is when we are actively reaching out to people in order for them to be welcomed here and also for the opportunity to share with them our Lord and the scriptures.
Scott Allen:But the government has a different job, right? Um and this is the this is the conflation, I think, that confuses people, right? And even, you know, I think just last week I was listening to the Pope and he came down really hard on President Trump's current immigration policy. You mentioned Catholic uh uh social services or, you know, world relief, I'm familiar with, these same organizations that um they also advocate, you know, not only are they involved at a local level in helping Christians to do ministry to refugees, but they also advocate strongly for an open borders policy. And I think I came to see this because they get they're actually getting financial benefit. You know, there's there's a uh, you know, as a as a nonprofit organization, they get uh grants from the government, you know, to facilitate they or they did anyways to facilitate large-scale immigration. So again, I'm all for you know the work that they're doing in local communities to help the church to care for immigrants. I'm not for them getting lots of money to facilitate just kind of an open borders policy.
Mark Moland:And again, this is along with that, yeah. Along with that, there were strings attached to that money, especially in um in the early 2000s, it was very clear, hey, we're gonna give you these funds. You can be practicing Christians doing this resettlement. Oh, but you cannot openly share your faith as part of the condition of these grants. And so you you you start limiting them. Plus, you know, now if you're an organization that's bringing in all this money, in order to do this good thing, um you'll want to keep those grants. And so you're gonna want to comply with more and more with what the government wants and the government's intentions rather than being responsive uh to the rest of the church and and then the situations that you're fighting in your own community.
Scott Allen:Yeah, that's right. And I think uh I of late too, Mark, I've been seeing that these larger systemic issues around immigration in a way I haven't before meaning that um, you know, it's always been interesting to me to look back, for example, at some of the strongest advocates against immigration 50 years ago are people like um oh shoot, what's the the famous um I can't think of his name right now. But he was a person on the left. And he was he was really against open borders, I mean, really strongly for the sake of for the for the fact uh economically that they were coming in and under, you know, they they were essentially coming in as indentured servants. I mean, they were getting paid, but they were getting paid a lot less than than it the local you know workers that he was really caring for, trying to care for. Um and uh, you know, I I I've come to see that today, you know, you have groups like um the Chamber of Commerce, who are also you know advocating for um you know kind of open borders type policy. And I've come to see, and I don't know, Mark, if you see it the same way, but uh they do kind of want to have just this low-cost pool of workers, you know, because they don't have to pay them as much as they do um naturalized U.S. citizens uh or just U.S. citizens. And of course, then there's the whole issue of voting, you know, we we need to have people come in that are gonna vote, you know, in a particular way. So there's these systemic issues that are driving it, it seems to me. You know, it's not just a care for people that are struggling and we want to, you know, give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses. It's not quite that way, you know, it seems to me.
Luke Allen:Well, and I mean uh just that argument alone, you know, we're helping the world by letting people in is just when you come down to simple economic numbers, we're not doing that much. You know, uh as of like five years ago, it was three billion people in the world were living on less than five dollars a day. I know it's gone up since then, but the real poor, poor people in the world, it's like almost half the world's population. Last I checked. Um and we're letting in maybe a million to ten million a year in in scope of three billion. That's not much of a drop in the bucket. And the only people that are actually able to make it all the way to our borders and get across tend to not be the very poorest of the poor. They tend to be in the world scheme, uh more on the more middle class, uh, the people that actually can afford to travel that far and aren't just trying to get the next meal, you know. So we're not we're not actually really letting in too many of those real, desperately poor people to help them. So I don't know. That's just that's very simplistic language, but it's it's just a good reminder when you're thinking about these things.
Scott Allen:Well, and of course there's the you know, I mean, there's all sorts of problems. If you're if your motivation is to help the poor in the world by opening our border, there's all sorts of problems with that. You know, you create a brain drain and you know, on the places, you know, around the world, these people are leaving their own countries, you know, and they're they're not able to help their own countries grow and develop because they're here now. So I don't know, there's just all sorts of issues. Uh Mark, I just really appreciate your you're obviously a person who's thought deeply about these, and not just deeply, but biblically. Um, and I just so appreciate that. Um any final kind of thoughts on you know, just this crazy place that we find ourselves in right now with on this issue, particularly of immigration, and what what you know, what um how should we be thinking about this and functioning as people that really want us honor the Lord and and do what's right? Um any final thoughts on that?
Mark Moland:I always come back to working for the shalom of the community to which you're involved. Because our temptation is so often, hey, we're going to fix it at the national level, we're going to go and just have a protest, we're going to write letters, we're going to try to fix the whole thing. In reality, change starts as as Chuck Olson used to say in a conversation over the backyard fence or by the grill. What do we need to do in our local communities to work together, having right relationships with each other, right relationships with the Lord in our community? You know, you know, it's members of churches in our churches saying, okay, this is this is the personal mission field that we have been given. You know, what is God calling us to do in order to build relationships that honor Him in this community? How do we right these relationships? How do we welcome and care for the strangers who are in our community? How do we work with law enforcement? How do we work with social services? How do we work with the schools and the nonprofits in our community to really build a cohesive community where we're interconnected with each other, we're influencing each other, we are trying to work together for the same sense of good in the community. And that's really where we need to need to be starting, is right at that local level.
Scott Allen:I agree. And uh but I think it I think it is tricky because um we want to be welcoming and supporting of immigrants at the same time. Some of those local people might be immigrations and customs officers working in our community. Their job description is to um, you know, maybe it's to to p deport people that are here illegally. Do we support them as well in that role? And this is where I think understanding the roles um is really important, the kind of God-given spheres of authority is important because I do think you could potentially support both. It seems kind of ironic, you know, you're here supporting people that are here even illegally as immigrants. But because because this person's got he's wearing the hat of uh of authority to protect the border, he can also be supported to do his job. Uh I don't know.
Mark Moland:Well, I think it's important to remember that those are human beings too. Yeah, they're also they may have strong opinions on the policy that they're enforcing, and it may not be um that, hey, I'm they may not be happy to be doing it, but they're they're doing what they feel called that they have to do. That's right. Uh getting to know them and being in relationship with enforcement, uh having conversations with enforcement, having the community understand what their role is here, uh, how uh you know they're human being too, that changes things.
Scott Allen:When uh very well said, yeah, not just viewing them as some kind of an amorphous threat to the world or whatever it is exactly.
Mark Moland:Yeah. When uh when I talk with students about policing, I say, do you police over people or do you police with people? Are are you over and trying to enforce law on people, or are you working with the people in the community, developing relationships there, uh, understanding uh the relationships in the community and understanding, okay, how can we all work together for a safer, stable community?
Scott Allen:Yeah, that's really, really well said, Mark. Those are great points. I think I like your bringing it back down to the very local, because again, uh Luke, you you I remember one time you said something to me that really um affected me. You said in uh in our our capacity as individual people, we can't have relationships with the whole world, much less the whole nation. You can only have relationships with a like what was the number there?
Luke Allen:Oh, that wasn't me. That's a study that came out of the UK. Yeah, on just understanding how many people we we can actually have a relationship with a relationship with and care about and have like an emotional connection to. For most people, it's less than a hundred. Some people can get up to 150. Right. That's about it.
Scott Allen:So yeah, that's about it. You know, and so who are those people in your community? And they may include both, you know, people on this issue, immigrants as well as people in law enforcement. Um and but but bringing it back to that local level and treating them as human beings, as people, um, and not just um as as you know as labels on some kind of bureaucracy or organization or group. Uh I think that's really, really helpful, Mark. So listen, we've we've uh this has been a really rich discussion. I th uh you know, I think for um the sake of our listeners, uh we probably better wrap it up. But I just want to thank you for your time so much, Mark, and for your work. And um really would love to have you back on if the if there's an opportunity to talk in in uh specific detail on some of these issues as well. This is really important uh issue in the United States around the world as well right now. So thank you very much for your time.
Mark Moland:Thank you. It's just been a pleasure to be with you today and and I enjoyed the conversation.
Luke Allen:Yeah, and Mark, as far as uh for people that are interested in this topic uh who want to go deeper, would you have any recommended resources that people could find on these topics? I know these are complex topics from a biblical worldview. And then uh number two, where can people find you if they want to learn more about you and what you do?
Mark Moland:Uh well you can find me. I'm uh at Laterno University. You can look me up there. My email address is uh on the web, markmoland at LETU.edu. And I'd love to uh engage more on these uh topics. Uh as far as additional resources go.
Luke Allen:Um you can you can send them to me later too. I'm putting you on the spot.
Mark Moland:I'd be happy to send some more to them to you later. Uh I think Zaddy S. Williams confronting injustice without compromising truth. That's a great book, great resource, in addition to Scott, your book on biblical justice and social versus social justice.
Scott Allen:Yeah.
Mark Moland:Those are some real critical books to think through uh how we're talking about justice uh in our time. Um I'd also say from the perspective of uh working for shalom in the city, I think Amy Sherman's Agents of Flourishing is a good way of starting to think through case what does it mean to work for shalom in our communities.
Luke Allen:Great, thanks. And one more time, how did you define shalom earlier today? I thought that was an excellent definition. I love that.
Mark Moland:Uh shalom, uh, well, the the theologian Neil Planaga described it as quote, the way things ought to be.
Luke Allen:Yeah.
Mark Moland:A deep sense inside of ourselves. Uh when I think of shalom, I think individually of the writing of relationships that we are um right with each other, right with God, uh boiling it down to Jesus' summary of the law. We love God, we love our neighbor, we love ourselves.
Luke Allen:That's so helpful. That's a great takeaway. All right, back to you, Dad.
Scott Allen:Yeah, thanks again, Mark. Appreciate it. And uh God bless you.
