Refugees

Discussion in 'Non-Anglican Discussion' started by Aidan, May 29, 2017.

  1. Aidan

    Aidan Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    683
    Likes Received:
    414
    Country:
    N Ireland
    Religion:
    Traditional RomanCatholic
    it's a Christians duty to shelter those in peril. What I don't get is, if someone is fleeing in fear for their life why don't they stop at the first safe place rather than insisting on travelling onwards to UK or Germany?
     
    alphaomega and Tom like this.
  2. Tom

    Tom New Member Anglican

    Posts:
    24
    Likes Received:
    16
    Country:
    UK
    Religion:
    Anglo-Catholic Anglican
    I agree, by travelling to somewhere out of reach it makes them economic refugees. Though it is our duty to help all refugees, I feel we should help those in the camps of Jordan, Syria and Libya with more aid and focus first, especially children. Those in Europe though still in need should be helped through processing. In this crisis we can only pray to the LORD in the hope that the cause can be solved in the Middle-East. However we do need make the system of controlling asylum seekers and refugees more efficient; as environmental disasters increase, and the Middle East and African becomes more unstable the pressure from migrants will only increase.
     
    Aidan likes this.
  3. Lowly Layman

    Lowly Layman Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    1,884
    Likes Received:
    1,675
    Country:
    USA
    Religion:
    American Anglican
    I suppose we need a little clearer explanation as to what "help" means before we discuss whether we are obliged to do it.
     
    Severus and Aidan like this.
  4. Mark

    Mark Well-Known Member Anglican

    Posts:
    203
    Likes Received:
    337
    Country:
    United States
    Religion:
    Happy Anglican
    those "refugees" were in camps in Turkey. Safe. That we are to care for them is true, but it is not a death sentence for us. Their actions show they are not fleeing for their lives. They see an opportunity and are taking it. Scripture tells us to take care of those who dwell among us. They live with us and obey our laws and customs. They do not take, break or harm.

    The Book of Ruth is a good example of how to treat the foreigner. Ruth comes to the land, lives and works with the people. Does not demand, does not break the laws or customs of the people. The other passages show we are to allow them to work and assimilate. Do not mistreat them, but expect them to obey your laws and customs.

    We are under no obligation to help invaders. Those who come to harm, disregard and destroy. Far too much evidence the "refugee" crisis is not a refugee crisis. The people groups like the Christians are rejected when it comes to getting them out of harms way.

    This is a progressive attempt to help bring about the destruction of the West and its "Christian" values the progressives see as an obstacle to achieving their utopia.

    The op says a "Christian duty". Does that bind a secular state? Does the state or Church follow the commands of God? Some will say both, though the question remains....does the secular state have to obey commands God gave the Church? If so, does the state have the authority to enforce Church attendance as God requires?

    Blessings

    Fr. Mark
     
    Tom, Lowly Layman and alphaomega like this.
  5. Aidan

    Aidan Well-Known Member

    Posts:
    683
    Likes Received:
    414
    Country:
    N Ireland
    Religion:
    Traditional RomanCatholic
    Unfortunately the social kingship of Christ has yet to come to fruition. When I talk of Christian duty, I refer to the responsibility of Christian people. Unfortunately, no nation I know of considers itself a Christian nation as secularism abounds
     

Share This Page