"Satan controlling the Church"? Marjorie Taylor Greene's dangerous view of Catholic Relief Services assistance to migrants

 

They really need to stop pretending to be theologians.  Politicians who claim to know the will of God are not only a danger to the Church and an detriment to evangelism, but they're also begging for God's judgment when they pervert his Word.  For their sake, and ours, this needs to stop.

James 3:1 (NIV)  Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

Marjorie Taylor Greene, first term congresswoman, recently told Church Militant {One of the most extremely political 'religious' sites I've ever seen} that the work being done by Catholic Relief Services to help migrants in the U.S. is, “What it is, is Satan’s controlling the church, the church is not doing its job, and it’s not adhering to the teachings of Christ, and it’s not adhering to what the word of God says we’re supposed to do and how we’re supposed to live."  She then went on to say, with a mocking voice and gestures, "What they're doing by saying 'Oh, we have to love these people and take care of these migrants and love one another.  This is loving one another'.  Yes, we are supposed to love one another, but their definition of what 'love one another' means destroying our laws, it means completely perverting what our constitution says, it means taking unreal advantage of the American taxpayer, and it means pushing a globalist policy on the American people and forcing America to become something we are not supposed to be."

MTG interview clip {To watch the clip quoted above, click on the link}

Ok, so a politician has declared that when Catholic Relief Services helps migrants they are abandoning the Word of God and the teachings of Christ, that any definition of 'love one another' is only applicable to those who, evidently, have not broken society's laws (in this case regarding immigration).  What then did Jesus say on the matter?

The text that MTG appears to be quoting (and horribly misunderstanding) is John 13:34-35

John 13:34-35 (NIV)  “A new command I give you: Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another.  35 By this everyone will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another.”

In that context, Jesus is telling his disciples that once he is gone, they will be known to the world as his followers if they demonstrate love to each other.  In other words, the followers of Jesus Christ are commanded to love each other, it is not optional.  What then does love look like?

I'm glad you asked, because the answer is important.

1 John 3:17-18 (NIV)  If anyone has material possessions and sees a brother or sister in need but has no pity on them, how can the love of God be in that person? 18 Dear children, let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth.

The Apostle John gives an illustration of what Jesus' command means.  In order to love a brother or sister in need, one must be willing to share material possessions with them. A person who claims to be a Christian, but is unwilling to help someone in need, especially a fellow believer, is not really a believer at all, as John said, "how can the love of God be in that person?"

James 2:14-17 (NIV)  What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

Likewise, James the half-brother of Jesus, is incredulous that anyone could claim to be a person of faith and yet not do anything to alleviate the physical needs of a brother or sister in Christ.

Are the migrants trying to come to America Christians?  So as to remove any wiggle room, there isn't any either way, but this sharpens the point, yes they are.  Overwhelmingly the migrants coming from Central and South America are professed followers of Jesus Christ.  They are NOT 'them', they are NOT an 'other'.  As believers in the universal Body of Christ, one Lord, one faith, one baptism, they are us, and we are them.  They are as much a part of the Universal Church as we are, and failing to help them, when and where we, individually and collectively, can is not simply a political choice, it is a sin.

1 Corinthians 12:12-13 (NIV) Just as a body, though one, has many parts, but all its many parts form one body, so it is with Christ. 13 For we were all baptized by one Spirit so as to form one body—whether Jews or Gentiles, slave or free—and we were all given the one Spirit to drink.

So, rather than being a perversion of the Gospel, helping migrants in need, who are also Christians, is exactly what Jesus would command us to do.  We are all a part of the Body of Christ.  Need more proof?  That's fine, the Scriptures have plenty to spare.

Matthew 25:34-40 (NIV) “Then the King will say to those on his right, ‘Come, you who are blessed by my Father; take your inheritance, the kingdom prepared for you since the creation of the world. 35 For I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in, 36 I needed clothes and you clothed me, I was sick and you looked after me, I was in prison and you came to visit me.’

37 “Then the righteous will answer him, ‘Lord, when did we see you hungry and feed you, or thirsty and give you something to drink? 38 When did we see you a stranger and invite you in, or needing clothes and clothe you? 39 When did we see you sick or in prison and go to visit you?’

40 “The King will reply, ‘Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.’

Because they may be in our country illegally, MTG (and many other politicians and pundits) have declared their need to be 'off limits'.  To help them is to encourage their lawbreaking, to have compassion on them is to endanger our nation, they say.  This is the opposite of what God's Word declares.  It is thinking like an American, not a Christian, and it is yet another illustration of the oft proved fact that when the Church and State mix together, it is the Church whose reputation is sullied.  When we think of America First, and our Christian obligations sometime later (if at all), we sin.

This teaching of Jesus is not something confined to the New Testament, it is simply taking the lessons of the Hebrew Scriptures and broadening them to fit the New Covenant's global ambitions.  A classic and powerful example of this is the book of Ruth.  Ruth is a Moabite, a nation connected to Abraham's nephew Lot, and by the time of the her story, a bitter enemy of the Israelites.  Ruth marries a Jew when he travels to her land with his family as refugees from a famine.  When he dies, Ruth travels with her mother-in-law Naomi back to Judea to Naomi's husband's (also now deceased) village with little hope for the future.  Ruth in Judea is not 'one of us', she is an outsider.  The entire story's gloomy trajectory changes when a righteous man named Boaz ignores Ruth's ethnicity by going above and beyond what was required in the Law of Moses of landowners at harvest time to support widows, orphans, and foreigners.  The extra kindness of Boaz begins a process which leads to his eventual marriage with Ruth and the bearing of a son named Obed, the grand-father of the great King David.

Leviticus 19:9-10 (NIV) “‘When you reap the harvest of your land, do not reap to the very edges of your field or gather the gleanings of your harvest. 10 Do not go over your vineyard a second time or pick up the grapes that have fallen. Leave them for the poor and the foreigner. I am the Lord your God.

It can be difficult to interpret and apply the Scriptures.  Some passages are hard for us to understand, and some circumstances in life are convoluted enough to make finding the moral choice challenging.  Whether or not to help migrants in need, no matter what nation they come to, or what nation they come from, is not such a case.  It is a 'textbook example' of God's Law in action, reminiscent of Boaz's compassion on Ruth, and following the words of Jesus, James, and John.  

Catholic Relief Services is NOT an example of "Satan controlling the Church".  Helping migrants in need is NOT a perversion of 'love on another'.  Politicians really need to stop pretending that they know the Bible well enough to speak for God.

Isaiah 5:20 (NIV)

20 Woe to those who call evil good

    and good evil,

who put darkness for light

    and light for darkness,

who put bitter for sweet

    and sweet for bitter.

** Another implication of MTG's worldview is that 'they' don't deserve our help.  This too is a massive fallacy when compared with the actions of Jesus.  Jesus spent time, purposefully, among tax collectors, prostitutes, and 'sinners' precisely because the self-righteous in his generation declared them to be off limits to God's love; by finding faith among them and bringing them to repentance, Jesus proved otherwise.

We are not absolved of our command to help others in the name of Christ if those others in question are deemed by our society to be unworthy of compassion.  No such distinction exists in the Christian worldview, all alike are sinners saved by grace, the hope of the Gospel is for everyone.  When the AIDS crisis first hit, many self-righteous Christians didn't want to get involved because it was a 'gay problem', this was an abandonment of Jesus' own strategy, let us not repeat the mistake by casting aside those seeking refuge in our nation. 

Luke 5:30-32 (NIV) But the Pharisees and the teachers of the law who belonged to their sect complained to his disciples, “Why do you eat and drink with tax collectors and sinners?”

31 Jesus answered them, “It is not the healthy who need a doctor, but the sick. 32 I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance.”

Our place, a Christians, and as a Church, is among the lawbreakers, the outcasts, and the forgotten.  

Further reading:

"You do you, I'll do me" - Quintessentially American, but incompatible with the Judeo-Christian worldview

Martin Luther's experience with the plague spoke powerfully during COVID, his understanding of our obligation to our neighbors fits here as well.

How should Christians act during a pandemic? - Wisdom from Martin Luther's experience with the Plague

The 'sin of empathy' fiasco is cut from the same cloth as MTG's new definition of 'love one another'

The folly of the "Sin of Empathy" - A self-inflicted wound to Christian Fundamentalism

Sermon Video: "You stood aloof", the failure to love your neighbor - Obadiah 10-21

The Folly of Angry Witnessing and the Folly of attacking Christians who befriend the Lost

Sermon Video: The fulfillment of God's plan for Ruth and Naomi - Ruth 4:1-22

What is the cost of redemption?  In the climax to the story of Ruth, Boaz and another potential kinsman-redeemer discuss the cost of redeeming the land of Elimelech.  At first, when it seems like a sweet business deal, the other man is interested, but when Boaz reveals that the land will not permanently pass to the one who redeems it because he will also acquire the obligation to marry Ruth and produce and heir to continue the line of Elimelech, the other man suddenly changes his mind; the cost was too high.  Boaz, because of the high value that he places upon Ruth, gladly steps in and fulfills the role of the kinsman-redeemer.  God subsequently blesses, Ruth and Boaz with a son, Obed, who is symbolically placed upon the lap of Naomi to show that he will inherit from Elimelech.  At the end of Ruth, we also learn that Ruth will become the great-grandmother of King David, thus also including her in the line of the Messiah.
Two important lessons jump out at us from the finale of Ruth. (1) The high cost of redemption for Boaz reminds us of the much higher cost paid by our kinsman-redeemer, Jesus, to redeem us from our sins.  Jesus paid it all to redeem humanity, paid with his life, but also gained for himself and for God's glory from among the Lost countless ones who trust in him unto salvation. (2) God was still willing to bless Naomi, even though she had earlier lost her faith.  The will of God was at work in Naomi's life, even if she didn't realize it, even through her darkest moments.  Naomi may have given up on God, but God never gave up on her.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Ruth approaches Boaz - Ruth 3:1-18

As the story of Ruth continues in this fourth part of five, Ruth embarks upon a seemingly bold plan given to her by her mother-in-law Naomi to confront Boaz with his status as a kinsman-redeemer and prompt him to make a decision about marrying Ruth.  The plan, though seemingly very odd in our minds, works as Boaz agrees to marry Ruth, a decision he arrives at quickly once he realizes that Ruth is even interested in an older man like him.  Throughout this process, Boaz has shown himself to be above reproach.  We have already seen his kindness in action, in this episode he displays the fortitude that resists sexual temptation, as well as the honesty that resists taking the easy way out (he informs Ruth of the closer kinsman-redeemer).  Boaz is not willing to falsely elevate the pursuit of happiness above the maintenance of righteousness, a character trait we all ought to imitate.  It is possible for God's people to live according to righteousness, in the small things and the big things, by grace; Boaz is proof enough of that.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Boaz notices Ruth - Ruth 2:8-23

In this third message, of five, from Ruth, we find Boaz conversing with Ruth after he takes notice of her hard at work gleaning in his fields.  Boaz offers Ruth multiple, small, and ongoing kindnesses in response, he says, for her devotion to her mother-in-law Naomi, the widow of his kin Elimelech.  Ruth responds to these offers of help with humble gratitude, prompting even more steps taken by Boaz to help Ruth (and Naomi) in their time of need.
When Ruth returns home at the end of the day, with much more food than expected, Naomi is awakened from her depression and bitterness that had engulfed her since the death of her husband and sons by the kindness shown to Ruth and herself by a seemingly random neighbor who turns out to be Boaz, a kinsman-redeemer of Elimelech's estate.  Whether or not Boaz will be willing to fulfill his legal obligation under the laws of the kinsman-redeemer remains to be seen, but Naomi at least has begun once again to hope.
The kindnesses offered by Boaz were not, in and of themselves, all that costly to him, nor was he legally obligated to give any of them.  And yet, as a man of God, a man of character, Boaz chooses to go beyond the letter of the law to fulfill the spirit of the law; Boaz chooses to live by grace.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video: Naomi's bitterness and Ruth's hard work - Ruth 1:19-2:7

In this second message from Ruth, of five, we see the full impact of the sorrow from Naomi's loss of her husband and two sons reflected in her statements of bitterness directed at "the Almighty" whom she holds responsible for her losses.  Naomi does not hide her true feelings, or pretend that she's fine with what the will of God has done in her life, no, Naomi is honest, and that honesty at this point in her life equals disappointment with God.
Ruth, meanwhile, sets about looking for a solution to the desperate circumstances facing herself and her mother-in-law as widows by participating in the process that the Law of Moses sets forth to help the poor: gleaning.  Ruth follows behind the harvesters in the fields, working hard, hoping to gather enough grain to feed herself and Naomi.  The hard work of Ruth draws the attention of the owner of the field, Boaz, a relative of her late father-in-law Elimelech, whose field, "as it turned out" she ended up working in.
While Naomi struggles with her bitterness, and Ruth begins working to try to survive, the hand of God is already at work, molding plans for Ruth and Naomi that include far more than just surviving.

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video - Ruth's Choice: Your God, My God - Ruth 1:1-18

In this first message of five covering the book of Ruth, the story begins with the unfolding of the tragedy that engulfed Naomi and her daughter-in-law Ruth.  Naomi's husband, Elimelech, moved his family during a time of famine from his portion of the Promised Land in Bethlehem of Judah across the Jordan River to the land of Moab.  From our perspective a simple economic choice, something we see in great abundance in our world today with its flood of migrants, but for the Covenant people the choice to leave the land is actually a moral one, a choice made by Elimelech that reflects poorly on his trust in God's providence.
In Moab, Elimelech dies, his two sons marry Moabite women, another moral choice with the potential for bringing foreign gods into the mix, and then after ten years both of Naomi's sons die.  At this point, Naomi is left without support and without hope for her future, a point the original Hebrew text highlights by calling her "the woman" instead of Naomi.  Naomi decides to return to Israel, where the LORD has given his people relief from the famine, and her daughters-in-law Orpah and Ruth begin the journey with her.  Naomi stops on the way and insists that these two young women who could still marry new husbands and have children must return to their mother's house and seek their own lives.  Naomi is bitter, feeling that the hand of God is against her, not seeing any potential way for the line of Elimelech to continue, seeing only lonely poverty in her future.  Orpah makes a rational choice to listen to this advice and parts from Naomi in sadness, Ruth however, makes the emotional choice to remain with Naomi and punctuates this choice with a beautiful oath of loyalty to Naomi's land, people, and God.  At this point the text does not indicate that Ruth knew the LORD or followed him, her choice is based upon love for her mother-in-law.  As the opening of Ruth ends, the two women continue on, Naomi returning home and Ruth entering into a strange new land.
There are two lessons in the opening segment of Ruth: (1) That even small choices can have consequences, both good and bad, and (2) the tremendous power of love and loyalty.  The question that remains is this: Will God alleviate the bitter sorrow of Naomi and reward the faithfulness of Ruth, and if so, how?

To watch the video, click on the link below:

Sermon Video, The Genealogy of Jesus Part1 - Matthew 1:1-5

I know what you're thinking, there can't be anything worth learning about a list of names.  The Genealogy of Jesus is just a list of names isn't it?  For Matthew, the inclusion of a genealogy at the start of his biography isn't unusual for the world he lived in, but a simple list of names this isn't.  Matthew tells a story through his list of names by including five women in the list.  It was unusual in such list to include any mothers, let alone five, but what strikes us as we look at the list is which mothers Matthew chose to highlight.  It wasn't the most respectable of the ancestors of the Messiah, but rather a trio (in the first half of this 2 part message) of women with foreign roots, two of whom had a checkered past.
The first woman listed in Matthew's account is Tamar.  Tamar isn't very familiar to us because her story is left out of every Sunday School material packet on Genesis.  Tamar was married to a dishonorable man, taken advantage of sexually by a greedy brother-in-law, and backed into a corner where she resorted to prostitution at the hands of a lustful father-in-law.  The twins boys who resulted from this union were included in the line of David, and hence the Messiah, rather than any of the other sons of Judah.
The second woman in the list is the prostitute and Canaanite, Rahab.  Now, Rahab is included in our telling of the story of Joshua and the battle of Jericho, although her profession prior to the arrival of the spies is often left out.  How did this woman, renowned for her faith in a God she didn't know about (see Hebrews chapter 11) end up marrying into the line of Judah after the Israelites entered into the Promised Land?
The last woman in the list is actually one that we have no problems with but that would have been considered suspect in her day because of being a Moabite.  Ruth is remembered for her loyalty and faith, and for finding a good and faithful man in Boaz, but she would have been an unlikely grandmother for Israel's greatest king had not God provided for her in response to her faith.
In the end, Matthew didn't have to include any of these women, but he chose to, that means something.  Is he trying to tell us that the Messiah came from an imperfect line as we all did, but was perfect himself?  Is he trying to tell us to judge these women with fresh eyes and see their true value by including these three in particular?  Regardless of what conclusion we come to about Matthew purpose, it seems clear that this isn't just a list of names.

To watch the video, click on the link below:
Sermon Video