It's not an amnesty!

Listening, as usual, to the BBC Radio 4 Today programme, this morning, and an interview with Damien Green, the Coalition Government's Immigration Minister, two familiar quotes came to mind.  The first was from the works of William Shakespeare: "A rose, by any other name, would smell as sweet" (Romeo and Juliet, Act 2, Scene 2); the second was from Lewis Carroll's book, Through the Looking Glass, in which Humpty Dumpty makes the statement that, "“When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean — neither more nor less.”

The issue was the claimed (or un-claimed, if you are Damien Green) amnesty for some 160,000 asylum-seekers who have been in the U.K. for at least six years.  These people, not all of whom, apparently, have been checked out, have been, in effect, granted an amnesty.  Keith Vaz, of the House of Commons Home Affairs Select Committee, who was also being interviewed, seemed to believe that these people had, in effect, been granted an amnesty.  On the simple basis that so many have been granted leave to stay in the UK, without the appropriate checks on the eligibility of their claims, I find it difficult not to agree with Mr Vaz!  Mr Green, on the other hand, insisted on speaking about an administrative measure!

Of course, as a disciple of Jesus, I would wish to assist anyone who was in serious danger in their own country.  The Children of Israel were instructed that they should not "... oppress a stranger ; you know the heart of a stranger , for you were strangers in the land of Egypt." (Ex 23:9).  Jesus was very clear that our treatment of a stranger is a mark of how we treat Him!  "... I was a stranger and you welcomed me, I was naked and you clothed me, I was sick and you visited me, I was in prison and you came to me.'  Then the righteous will answer him, 'Lord, when did we see thee hungry and feed thee, or thirsty and give thee drink?  And when did we see thee a stranger and welcome thee, or naked and clothe thee?  And when did we see thee sick or in prison and visit thee?' And the King will answer them, 'Truly, I say to you, as you did it to one of the least of these my brethren, you did it to me.'" (Matt 25:35-40).

However, it is also true that, writing under the inspiration of God the Holy Spirit, Paul tells us that, "If any one will not work , let him not eat.  For we hear that some of you are living in idleness, mere busybodies, not doing any work .  Now such persons we command and exhort in the Lord Jesus Christ to do their work in quietness and to earn their own living." (II Thess 3:10-12).

This, it seems to me, is the crux of the matter.  Those who are in danger - and I know of so many in the persecuted church who fall into that category - should, surely, be welcomed, and supported until they are in a position to support themselves.  On the other hand, those who simply want to come to the UK for the social benefits that are so readily provided, should be returned to their country of origin and encouraged to work to improve the lot of both themselves and their fellow-country-men/women.

It seems so simple to me - but perhaps I am looking at the whole situation in too simplistic a manner!  Doubtless, if I am, someone will find this post, and take the time to write a corrective comment!