ELCA World Hunger Education and Networking Grants

Henry Martinez

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America

2014

ELCA World Hunger Education and Networking grants are available to support local efforts to educate and mobilize ELCA congregations, groups, and/or synods. This particular grant program supports engaging educational and networking opportunities focused on the root causes of and solutions to hunger.

In 2014 we are particularly interested in receiving education proposals that focus on increasing youth and young adult engagement; address racism, sexism and classism within domestic poverty; and increase awareness of the experience of domestic poverty. Education funding can be used for events, educational programs or the development of shareable resources. For networking proposals, congregation-based and synod-based hunger leader trainings will be prioritized.

We are looking for proposals submitted by a non-profit charitable organization classified as a 501(c)(3) public charity by the Internal Revenue Service, or operate under the fiscal sponsorship of a 501(c)(3) that must:

Provide a short (2-3 paragraph) description of your congregation, group or organization and a narrative of the context in which the project, event or initiative will take place. This should clearly show what your program, congregation or group is attempting to address and how the proposal relates to the current priorities for ELCA World Hunger Education and Networking.
Summarize how the project, event, or initiative will:
1. Educate and mobilize ELCA congregations, groups, and/or synods;
2. Influence this church body toward better action and engagement against hunger and poverty; and
3. Encourage sustainable participation in the anti-hunger work of ELCA World Hunger
Provide a clear “goal statement” that summarizes the direction and focus of the program and defines the scope.
For education proposals, please list the learning objectives and audience for the event, resource or initiative which the grant will support.
List two or three specific, measurable objectives by which the success of your proposal implementation will be evaluated.
1. At least one process objective: What activities will be completed in what specific time period?
2. At least one outcome objective: What are the expected results—what change, by how much, where and when?
Summarize the implementation strategies and methods and/or sustainability of your plan (identifying additional sources of funding if needed.)
Demonstrate an ELCA connection with one letter of support by an ELCA pastor, bishop, or Lutheran agency/institution that explains how a relationship between the organization and ELCA World Hunger impacts/enhances each other’s work and furthers the objectives and guidelines of ELCA World Hunger.
Include your organization’s name, address, contact person, email, phone number, and tax ID number with your proposal.
The amount of funding you are seeking. Please include a budget for the event, project or initiative using the narrative budget format (example shown below):

Item	Amount	Explanation
Put the line item label here	Put the line item cost here.	Describe how you came to that amount (show your calculations, if relevant). You may also use this section to further explain why you need this cost covered, if you believe that is not clear from the proposal.

Proposals will be reviewed throughout the year. All proposals must be received by December 31, 2014 to be considered for funding.

If you have any questions please email hunger@elca.org.

10 Facts on Women and Hunger

Henry Martinez

1. In developing regions, the proportion of people living on less than USD $1.25 a day fell from 47 per cent in 1990 to 22 per cent in 2010. Extreme poverty is also falling in every region.¹

2. Hunger and poverty remain stubbornly ‘feminized’ – globally, 70 percent of people living in absolute poverty are female.²

3. Surveys in a wide range of countries have shown that 85 to 90 percent of the time spent on household food preparation is spent by women.³

4. Women are much more likely to earn poverty-level wages than men. In 2011, 32 percent of women earned poverty-level wages or less, while 24.3 percent of men earned the same.⁴

5. Globally, malnourished mothers are more likely to give birth to underweight babies. Underweight babies are 20 percent more likely to die before the age of five.⁵

6. Women’s labor force participation in Latin America and the Caribbean region has risen 35 percent since 1990 (a more dramatic rate than any other region). It is estimated that between 2000 and 2010 extreme poverty in the region would have been 30 percent higher if not for women’s participation in the labor force.⁶

7. Women make up the majority (66 percent) of sub-minimum wage workers (earning $2.13 an hour) in tipped restaurant occupations, compared to 48 percent of the non-tipped restaurant workforce (earning $7.25 an hour).⁷

8. Higher education opportunities for women and girls are crucial for battling poverty. The gross enrolment rate for girls at lower secondary level increased from 69 to 81 percent between 1999 and 2010, and from 43 to 58 percent at the upper secondary level in the same period.⁸

9. Researchers estimate that rural women produce half the world’s food and, in developing countries, between 60% and 80% of food crops.⁹

10. The Food and Agriculture Organization estimates that if women had the same agricultural access to resources and markets as men yield gaps would be closed by 20-30%, reducing the number of undernourished people by 100-150 million.¹⁰

Sources:

1 http://www.unwomen.org/en/news/in-focus/mdg-momentum#MDG1. The Millennium Development Goals Report 2013, 7. Access: http://www.un.org/millenniumgoals/pdf/report-2013/mdg-report-2013-english.pdf.

2 Bread for the World Hunger Report (2014), 160.

3 http://www.wfp.org/our-work/preventing-hunger/focus-women/women-hunger-facts

4 Lawrence Mishel, Josh Bivens, Elise Gould, Heidi Shierholz, “The State of Working America,” 12^th Ed. (Cornell University Press, Noevember 2012), 193.

5 “Progress for Children: A World Fit for Children Statistical Review,” UNICEF, (December 2007), p.7.http://www.unicef.org/progressforchildren/2007n6/files/Progress_for_Children_-_No._6.pdf

6 “Gender at Work: A Companion to the World Development Report on Jobs,” the World Bank Group (2013), p. 8.

7 “Tipped Over the Edge: Gender Inequality in the Restaurant Industry,” Restaurant Opportunities Centers United, 2012 report, 9.

8 “From Access to Equality,” United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization Report (2012), p.22.

⁹FAO Focus on Women and Food Security, prepared by the Women in Development Service, FAO Women and Population Division, FAO, Access: http://www.fao.org/sd/fsdirect/fbdirect/fsp001.htm.

¹⁰ “The State of Food and Agriculture 2010-2011,” Food and Agriculture Organization report,http://www.fao.org/docrep/013/i2050e/i2050e00.htm.

Food for Families at Spanaway Lutheran Church

Henry Martinez

Food pantries get started in a variety of ways. For Spanaway Lutheran Church, it was when Lawanna Lee, founder and co-pastor of El Shaddai Christian Ministries in nearby Tacoma, Washington called to ask about the possibility of developing a partnership. Shortly after a visit to Tacoma, and approval from Spanaway’s congregational council, they were on their way to starting the Food for Families program. The congregation is one of 384 organizations addressing hunger and poverty to receive an ELCA World Hunger funded domestic hunger grant in 2014. Of those 384 organizations, 45 are receiving funds for food pantries.

One thing that makes Food for Families unique is that it is open on Sundays following the worship service. The congregation saw that opening the pantry on Sunday would serve a couple important needs. The first being the acknowledgment that hunger doesn’t rest. Spanaway Lutheran serves an area with a 16.3% poverty rate (numbers from 2012 census data). Other food pantries nearby are open Monday through Friday, but oftentimes during hours that are not the most convenient for families who have to work during the week.

According to congregation member and Food for Families director Edna Coonc, the congregation has served 250 families (about 1,200 people) in almost two years since the program started. Approximately 80% of the clients are families with children. The congregation purchases enough food for ten families each week (about 700 pounds of food) from El Shaddai Ministries, while also receiving donated food from the congregation. This allows them to serve fifteen families each week. The families can choose what they need for the week from a selection that includes meat, produce, pastries, and other staple items. Food for Families also benefits the before and after school education (BASE) ministry of the congregation, a program serving Kindergarten to 5^th grade students.

The second reason for opening the pantry on Sunday is for community and the opportunity for fellowship that wouldn’t be available during the week. Coonc says, “We invite the people who come into the food shelf to stay for a cup of coffee. I’ve heard people say, ‘you guys aren’t judging us’ and ‘we don’t feel like you guys are pointing us out.'” This has provided the opportunity for relationships to develop where patrons of the food pantry have joined the congregation and become volunteers of the ministry. It requires a communal effort with congregation members giving financial and material donations as well as their time. Coonc reports that approximately 20 volunteers help keep the ministry going.

But the community aspect runs deeper than just getting bodies for a particular ministry. Pastor John Schier-Hanson feels that having the Food for Families pantry open on Sunday allows for something else to happen. He says, “Charity has become institutionalized in this country. The giver and receiver have become disconnected. But I think there is a redemptive quality for both giver and receiver to experience here— for the receiver it’s knowing that someone cares for them, for the giver it functions to feel they are not just giving to a cause, but to a person and family. It helps us realize that we are part of the same body. We’re all in this life together.”

Movie Review – Paycheck to Paycheck: The Life and Times of Katrina Gilbert (HBO)

Henry Martinez

“She flies with her own wings.” With these words, Katrina Gilbert translates her tattoo and sets the tone for the remaining 73 minutes of the documentary. Her story is one of many untold stories in America. As the movie states in the opening, 42 million women in America— one in three— are living in poverty or teetering on its brink. More than 15 million are mothers of children. Katrina is the mother of three children, separated from her husband of ten years with, in her words, “nothing to show for those ten years but three beautiful children.”

Katrina works full time as a Certified Nursing Assistant, earning $9.49/hr. As she ticks through a mental list of payments she needs to make, we get an idea of how quickly her paycheck is carved up and what little she has left after bills. There is a certain practicality and planning her situation demands as she manages her family’s finances. This takes shape as she considers financial matters and recreational options for her children, like not letting them play outside when it is wet and cold because she can’t afford to miss work (thus not get paid) if they get sick. Facing demands from work and family, the documentary shows Katrina as one who carries out her duties with tireless devotion. The movie clearly illustrates this comes with a price, and we see the toll it takes on Katrina’s health.

At times it seems the documentary wants to show her as a woman just trying to hold on. As a result, hope seems elusive. In one scene she learns that she’ll be receiving money back from a tax return and excitedly comments, “I can pay off my car!” She quickly names things she could put the money toward, and by the end of the list both excitement and money seem all but spent. There is another scene where her joy at being admitted to a local college is tempered by a rejection of her financial aid application. We keep waiting for something to go her way. We see someone to root for instead of someone to pity. And we want to root for her because she is doing it the way it “should” be done.

This isn’t a picture of someone who is struggling with her own bootstraps. It is a story of someone who firmly has them in hand and is still barely able to cope. As Katrina’s story unfolds, the directors emphasize (implicitly) the need for a more nuanced conversation about poverty, specifically one that doesn’t end with mere employment. Instead we are asked to consider the importance of access to education, quality and affordable childcare, medical care and a living wage. While the movie does not present a clear call to action, it presents a story that is decidedly – unfortunately – American.

Katrina’s story critiques the assumption that economic stability is within reach for most Americans if they simply work hard. The directors want us to see that her story is not merely an aberration in an otherwise reliable system, but that the system we have relied on for economic mobility is a failure. Rather than the exception, Katrina’s story is rapidly becoming the rule in an increasingly harsh economy.

Of course the extent to which the viewer identifies with Katrina Gilbert is subjective. If her story is just one of the one in three women in America, the chances are likely there are Katrina Gilberts in our congregations and communities. Our challenge is whether or not we see her story as one that is the backbone of our future and intrinsically connected to our own well-being. It is recognizing that economic vulnerability is a reality in our midst. As a result, people of faith will find this movie particularly useful if they are willing to explore what resources are within their midst not only to help people like Katrina weather the storms of their lives, but to put their energies toward seeking systemic change. It calls to mind the work the ELCA is doing to strive for gender justice and fair minimum wage standards. The movie puts to rest the question of whether the systems of support in our communities are adequate, and leaves room for us to imagine how we might care for our neighbors who are weary from flying alone.

Availability: Currently the movie can only be streamed on HBO GO; you can also find more information about the movie, see a trailer and discussion guide from HBO.

Henry Martinez is Program Associate for Hunger Education with ELCA World Hunger.

Carrying the Cross in Public

Ryan P. Cumming

protest2

Used with permission from Boston at en.wikipedia

In the summer of 2012, Junior Garcia carried a 12-foot wooden cross from his home in Texas to Washington, DC, in an attempt to share the gospel in the public square.

In February of this year, a secular group filed a lawsuit to remove a 40-foot tall cross from public land in a suburb of Washington, DC. A quick Google search will reveal lots of similar stories.

What does it mean to bear the cross in public? This is a question that has been on my mind a lot as I prepare to join other Christians in Washington, DC, for Ecumenical Advocacy Days this weekend. I sincerely doubt that many of us will show up with literal crosses on our backs. And erecting a marble/wooden/plastic cross on the National Mall doesn’t appear on my copy of the agenda. Yet, many of us will travel to Washington believing that people marked by the cross have something worthwhile to say in the public square. We will carry the cross in public, to the halls of our government.

Too often, Christians have carried the cross in public with a steady supply of nails, ready to pin down and condemn their neighbors. The public face of Christianity in America, it seems to me, is too often a posse of crucifiers, rather than a communion gathered around the crucified. To bear the cross in public does not mean fighting over monuments or carrying literal crosses, and it certainly does not mean entering political life with a readiness to put others on the cross. As Lutherans, we believe that we are marked by the cross in baptism and shaped by it for our whole lives. We are a cruciform (“cross-shaped”) people, who bear our mark in private – at home or church – and in public – as workers and citizens. And this must mean something more profound than either of the alternatives above.

To bear the cross, to enter politics and public life as one shaped by the cross, is to be marked by three qualities: humility, honesty and love.

Humility

The cross is a problem that confounded early Christians and continues to confound us. Christian history is filled with attempts to explain the cross, but the cross is nothing short of a scandal. To bear the troubling cross is to carry with us the humble awareness that we don’t have all the answers. The cross restrains those who would enter the public square with a triumphalist Christianity as much as it chastens those who believe that any human government or policy or law can ultimately solve all the world’s problems.

The first person who reveals Jesus’ true identity in the Gospel of Mark is the most unlikely of characters: “Now when the centurion, who stood facing him, saw that in this way he breathed his last, he said, ‘Truly this man was the Son of God!'” (Mark 15:39). In the Gospel of Luke, it is from a common criminal, executed with Jesus, that we hear a clear pronouncement of Jesus’ innocence and a sustaining faith in the coming Kingdom of God (Luke 23:39-43).

To be marked by the cross is also to recognize that wisdom and clear sight are gifts God grants in unlikely places, to unexpected people. Cross-shaped advocates recognize this and remain open to this wisdom wherever it arises. This means being open to dialogue and discernment with a variety of people. Being shaped by the openness that comes from humility, we know that public life is lived in common, among people with diverse gifts.

Honesty

To bear the cross is to be marked by honesty. We know as well as Isaiah did that “truth stumbles in the public square” (Is. 59:14). Yet, as cross-shaped advocates, we are called to speak the truth from a long tradition of truth-tellers, ancestors like Moses, who “spoke truth to tyrannical power” (Paul Hanson, Political Engagement as Biblical Mandate, p. 32) and Amos, who refused to be silent in the face of injustice.

Most of us know the famous story of David and Bathsheba. David saw Bathsheba bathing, desired her and so arranged for the death of her husband. After David had claimed her for his own, the prophet Nathan told him the story of a rich man who cheated a poor man out of the one small lamb that the poor man had raised (see 2 Samuel 12:1-15). “Who is this man? He deserves to die!” David exclaimed, to which Nathan, in an ironic turn, shouts, “You are the man!” Nathan holds a mirror up to David to reveal to the king his own injustice. Sent by God, Nathan dares to speak the truth when power becomes corrupt.

The cross, too, is a mirror. We see in its torturous use the oppressive power of the Roman empire. It reveals to us the depth of human sin which would lead us to kill our own savior. There is nothing joyous or triumphant here; there is simply a body broken by the political and religious power that sin corrupts. To bear the cross is to hold up a mirror to a sinful world. This means channeling Nathan and speaking the truth in the face of injustice. It means telling the stories many don’t wish to hear. Truth demands that we speak up, with and, sometimes, for those who really are “left behind”: the poor, the marginalized and the excluded.

Love

Yet, to carry the cross is also to be a loving presence within the public square. The cross reveals the depth of human sin, but it also reveals the more profound depths of God’s love. And the empty cross reveals that, in the end, it is God’s love – and not human sin – which wins out. The cross reveals a broken humanity, persons whose lives are one long via dolorosa, who cannot overcome injustice on their own. To carry the cross in public is to accompany in love those who are treated unjustly.

To be a Christian advocate for justice demands – and offers – much more than dogged pursuit of a policy or a position. Perhaps by taking up our cross as Lutherans, we can showcase a faithful citizenship that is loving, just and worth listening to.

Ryan P. Cumming, Ph.D., is the Program Director of Hunger Education for ELCA World Hunger. Ryan.Cumming@ELCA.org

Paul’s Humbly Firm Request

Henry Martinez

The word advocacy does not appear in the letter to Philemon. Interestingly, the word commonly translated as advocate (paraclete) appears a few times in John’s gospel, once in 1 John and nowhere else in the New Testament. But Paul’s letter to Philemon is a helpful example of how theology and practicality come together in a personal advocacy-like appeal. It seems lazy to consider only a few verses of Philemon since the book is so short, but the following passage provides a glimpse at Paul’s tone and strategy.

For this reason, though I am bold enough in Christ to command you to do your duty, yet I would rather appeal to you on the basis of love—and I, Paul, do this as an old man, and now also as a prisoner of Christ Jesus. I am appealing to you for my child, Onesimus, whose father I have become during my imprisonment. Formerly he was useless to you, but now he is indeed useful both to you and to me. I am sending him, that is, my own heart, back to you. I wanted to keep him with me, so that he might be of service to me in your place during my imprisonment for the gospel; but I preferred to do nothing without your consent, in order that your good deed might be voluntary and not something forced. (Philemon 1:8-14)

Onesimus was a slave in Philemon’s house who, for some reason, may have wronged Philemon and somehow found Paul. We can only guess if Onesimus knew of Paul’s influence or had hoped for a result other than the one Paul was willing to provide. But from this letter it is evident that Paul has chosen to come alongside Onesimus and speak out on his behalf to someone who has sway over Onesimus’ future. One of the key moves in this letter is Paul’s emphasis on the change in Onesimus’ status. The change from “useless” to “useful” may be more rhetorical than descriptive, but the change from slave to beloved brother (v.16) demands more attention.

Paul is able to call Philemon brother because of the new identity they share in Christ. His appeal is for Philemon to see his relationship with Onesimus in the same way, that is, through Christ. This of course hadn’t settled the issue of slavery or how Christians should respond to it as an institution. But his appeal works in a different way. Paul appeals to Philemon’s faith in Christ knowing that it is something that has shaped him as well as the community to which he belongs. Since this faith has influenced Philemon’s attitude, Paul is hopeful that it will influence his relationships as well. In this case, Philemon has a claim on Onesimus that Paul wants to contextualize in terms of faith in Christ. Since Christ’s self-giving love demonstrates what laying down power looks like, Paul is presenting Philemon with the opportunity to do the same with Onesimus. He is not appealing to some general ethic of looking out for the interest of someone in need (which is not a uniquely Christian idea), but Paul is asking Philemon to set aside worldly power for the sake of Christian love. At some unidentified point, the two become incompatible.

When interpreting Philemon it is difficult to ignore the passages that seem slightly passive aggressive, if not opaque. First is the fact that the letter is addressed not just to Philemon, but to the church in his home. What was Paul hoping the others would do with this? He also notes that he is bold enough to command Philemon but chooses not to. What function does this serve if not to appeal to Paul’s stature in the community? There is another subtle move. Paul has been building his case through verse 13, then backs off just for a moment to recognize Philemon’s agency in the matter by stating that he wants this to be something voluntary rather than forced. Paul is not afraid to tell Philemon what he should do but he concedes that the choice is Philemon’s. Finally, Paul tells Philemon to get the guest room ready because he is planning to visit. The request may of course be innocent, but it may also be Paul’s way of saying he is coming to see for himself how things shook out.

What does this mean for how we understand advocacy? There may be some useful tactics for us to employ. However, it probably isn’t as simple as trying to identify parallels between this letter and our contemporary context; a significant discrepancy being that we aren’t usually on equal footing with Paul regarding the leveraging ability of our advocacy efforts. It requires a special relationship to even be received like Paul. I would offer that it has something substantial to say to us about how we understand power. Whether we have the influence of Paul or not, aligning our voice (individual and collective) with another’s need, especially the most vulnerable, is part of how we express our faith in Christ. In this way it is both with humility and boldness that we write to legislators, seek to change policy, and try to build relationships with our neighbors.

To find out more about advocacy efforts and resources in the ELCA visit http://www.elca.org/Our-Work/Publicly-Engaged-Church/Advocacy.

Daily Work — Making a Difference in the Lives of Immigrants

Julie Hoff

Imagine.

You are smart and charming. You’re motivated to succeed. You’ve moved across the world, left behind your friends and family, and embraced a very different culture to start a new life, hopefully a better life, in America.

But your first year here was really tough. You lived in a homeless shelter because you couldn’t find a job or an affordable place to live. Because you are a new immigrant, you are ineligible for most forms of public assistance. Even though you’re a college graduate, it doesn’t matter in America because you weren’t educated here. Plus, it’s almost impossible to get a call back for a job interview, because no one knows how to pronounce your name, and rather than call you, employers simply move on to the next candidate.

Imagine you are Baryogar (pronounced buy-yo-gar), who came to the United States as a refugee from Liberia. In Liberia, Baryogar had jobs in human resources and bookkeeping. But when he arrived in America, Baryogar couldn’t find any job.

Baryogar and Sarah

“When I came here, I didn’t have any idea of American culture. In Africa, it is a sign of disrespect to look in someone’s face. I had to learn in America, it is the opposite. Without Daily Work’s help, I would not have learned those things and I would not have gotten a job,” Baryogar said.

Founded as a Lutheran ministry in 2000 by a collaboration of ELCA pastors in St. Paul, Minnesota, Daily Work’s mission is to assist job seekers by helping them prepare for, find and maintain work that enables them to support themselves and their families. We operate from two ELCA churches in the Twin Cities: Christ on Capitol Hill in St. Paul and Christ the King in New Brighton.

Baryogar is one of more than 750 people affected by joblessness and poverty who have come through Daily Work’s doors to get the personalized help they need to transform their lives and become contributing members of the workforce. Today, more than 60 percent of the people Daily Work serves are immigrants, most of who are from the African countries of Ethiopia, Eritrea, and Liberia.

Baryogar continues to work as a nursing assistant in the same job Daily Work helped him find in 2007. His transition to America, while challenging, also came with some advantages. For example, English is the official language in Liberia, which meant that Baryogar had significantly better English skills than many other new immigrants. Baryogar was also a refugee, which enabled him to receive some refugee support and public assistance for up to eight months following his arrival in America. (However, most immigrants to Minnesota are not eligible for these types of supports. To learn more, read hereabout how medical assistance has been cut in Minnesota.)

Typically, the immigrants Daily Work serves come to the U.S. by “winning” a diversity visa. The Diversity Immigrant Visa program is a congressionally mandated lottery program that annually makes available 55,000 permanent resident visas to natives of countries deemed to have low rates of immigration to the United States.

According to Abera, another Daily Work job seeker and visa lottery winner, it was shocking to find out how hard it is to get a job in America and provide for his family here…and in Africa. Many immigrant families expect the family member now in America to send money home to Africa to help support them.

“I came here because I heard America is the land of opportunity. Everybody wishes to come to America. Life is very hard in Africa, the income from jobs in Africa is not enough to make a life and the politics are very unstable. In order to afford to come here, my family sold their family home to pay for all the expenses for me and my wife to move here. It was a big sacrifice for them because now my mother must live in a public house,” Abera said.

Abera

Abera first came to Daily Work in mid-2012, about 18 months after moving to America. In that time, he had worked four different, temporary jobs that kept ending in lay-off. In the fall of 2012, Abera again came to Daily Work after being laid-off from another temp job. In addition to helping him put together a better resume and cover letter, his Daily Work counselor suggested that he take a 10-week job training course through another local nonprofit organization.

“Abera needed something new on his resume that demonstrated his work ethic and drive to succeed,” said Julie Hoff, Daily Work Executive Director. “We felt that taking this course would give him a bigger network, fresh information on his resume, and of course, some new skills to showcase to employers,” Hoff said.

The strategy worked! Today, Abera has a year of steady work history. He currently works two full-time jobs, one as a security officer and the other as a customer service provider at an airport. While he knows he still has a long way to go to achieve his goal to be a small business owner, Abera feels good about the progress he has made in the past year.

“This is all possible for me because of help from Daily work. Now this day is brighter for me because I can help myself and my family. Having a good work means to me that I have more options to develop my career and take care of my family, both here and in Africa,” he said, smiling.

These are just two examples of the immense challenges new, legal immigrants face when moving to the U.S. While most of the focus on immigration today is about border issues and undocumented immigrants, there are many barriers and issues that new, legal residents of the United States face, including lack of financial support following arrival, difficult immigration laws that keep families apart, and unfair employment practices that both discriminate against and take advantage of immigrants who will do anything to survive.

On top of that, new immigrants face tremendous challenges just to learn English and drive a car, obtain new education and job skills that American employers value, and simply understand and adapt to American culture. As native-born Americans, we have had 20 years or more to gain the key assets needed to obtain living wage work: English language skills, cultural competence, formal education, and driving skills. Imagine if you had to learn all these things in a matter of weeks or months and support your family at the same time.

Daily Work was founded by ELCA pastors who believe that we are called to serve others and to share our personal gifts in meaningful ways. The ELCA, its congregations, and people like you play an important role in helping new immigrants by starting and supporting programs in your communities like Daily Work; but you can also make a difference by speaking out as voices for reform. Please consider what you can do to make life better for someone new to America. To learn more about immigration reform and the challenges facing immigrants, check out the resources below.

Challenges Facing New Immigrants and Refugees

Reform Immigration for America

Fair Immigration Reform Movement

Campaign for Community Change

Julie Hoff is the Executive Director of Daily Work in St. Paul, Minnesota. Daily Work is a nonprofit organization supported, in part, by a Hunger Education grant from ELCA World Hunger.

“But they’re here ILLEGALLY!”

Ryan Cumming

tombstone1

Well THAT epitaph is sure to get a lot of rubbings. Perhaps in the right cemetery, it might be a perfect fit. After all, there is something to be said about following the law. Indeed, in great measure, the safety and security of a community depends less on the ability to efficiently deter lawbreakers – or to swiftly punish them – than on the hope that the majority of citizens won’t break the law in the first place.

Lutherans historically have appreciated the important role of civil laws. At a minimum, the law – and the powers that exist to enforce it – help us go about our daily lives in relative security. Martin Luther was famously supportive of obedience to civil laws and to the ruling authorities in his day. When the peasants rebelled against the landed gentry in Germany, Luther referred to them as animals, writing that they should be killed like “mad dogs” (which brings up a whole other question of animal cruelty – see the colorfully titled “Against the Robbing and Murdering Hordes of Peasants,” 1525). Of course, the Lutheran deference to civil laws and authority has led to other problems. One of the more dangerous memories of Lutheran history is the use of this obedience to undergird support for Hitler and the Nazi Party in Germany. (Truth be told, Luther’s prevalent anti-Semitism didn’t help much, either.)

Still, the Lutheran notion that civil law is a gift from God meant to help us live lives in security and safety is an important one. It keeps Lutherans in a unique middle ground, between those who believe that being faithful means abandoning their identity as citizens of a country and those who believe that faithful citizenship means making sure all the laws of the land reflect their own religious beliefs. This is at the heart of that pesky “two kingdoms” stuff we Lutherans keep touting. God enables us to be citizens so we can exercise responsibility, live out our faith and serve our neighbors free of the chaos and fear of anarchy.

Lutheran citizens are neither expatriates nor demagogues. We don’t have to choose between abandoning our country and dominating our country in order to live in it faithfully. The law, for Lutherans, serves an important function, one which we support and one in which we are engaged.

So, why is my epitaph above still lacking a bit of luster? Why is it that I want to leave a mark on this world that goes a bit deeper than just being “a law-abiding citizen”?

Lutherans appreciate the law; we value it; ideally, we follow it (and, obviously, here we’re talking about civil laws, not the Law of God. That’s a topic for a different day.) But, we also recognize that the law isn’t good in itself. It’s good because of the purpose that God intends for it.

Laws, and the authorities that enforce them, are good because they keep us safe, they help organize our lives, and they help us live meaningfully and responsibly as members of a human community. They have a deeper purpose than merely commanding our obedience. We see this in how we talk about laws, in general. We don’t merely want enforceable laws; we want just laws. We don’t want laws that merely keep us safe; we want fair laws. We don’t want laws that merely constrain our lives; we want laws that enrich our lives. And we lift up these same qualities in ourselves and our leaders. In the 2009 Social Policy Resolution on immigration reform, the ELCA outlined this pretty clearly: “Governing authorities are to seek justice, foster peace, protect people, and support their well-being.” There is something more profound that we want for ourselves and for our community than merely obedience.

tombstone2

Aha! Now THERE’S an epitaph I can live with! (Umm…)

So often we get focused on obedience to the law without plunging deeper into the values that we, as law-making and law-abiding citizens, are supposed to pursue through this obedience. The rhetoric surrounding the immigration debate in the US is, tragically, a good example of this.

“We do not owe people who broke our laws to come into the country.” (Rep. Michelle Bachmann, R-MN)

“These illegal aliens are criminals and we need to treat them as such.” (Rep. Paul Broun, R-GA)

Outside the hallowed halls of government, how many of us haven’t heard some version of this sentiment: “But they’re here illegally! They’re criminals! They broke the law!” In the debate, we’ve lost touch with the notion that there is more to citizenship than obedience, and more to laws than merely restrictions. Good laws – like good citizens – reflect our deepest feelings about justice, fairness, and the common good. Good laws, like good citizens, enable and enrich life.

To what extent do current immigration laws do this? To what extent to they reflect – and form – a society that is just, where life is enhanced by opportunity and community? To what extent do they measure up to the vision Americans have of our nation, and how do they reflect the vision God intended for human laws and human societies?

As Rev. Stephen Bouman, the executive director of the Congregational and Synodical Mission Unit of the ELCA pointed out recently, over 24,000 unaccompanied minors crossed the border between Mexico and the United States in 2013. They risked starvation and violence to make the passage here, only to be incarcerated by the US when caught. It is no secret what led them to take this modern-day journey through the wilderness to a land of promise: violence, abject poverty, desperation.

Those who are not caught, incarcerated, or deported often find that the “promised land” is not without its own challenges. Of the estimated 11 million living in the US illegally, nearly 4 million are living in poverty. Even those immigrants who are living here legally still find themselves relegated to jobs, especially in food production and food service, that do not pay a living wage (See Bread for the World’s 2014 Hunger Report). It seems that even being “obedient” is not enough to feed one’s family.

Our tradition gives us a way of talking about immigration and the obstacles immigrants face. Citizenship, for Lutherans, is about more than following laws and paying taxes. It is about contributing to a community that reflects God’s good plans for human life. While never perfect, life within a political community now is supposed to give us a glimpse “through a glass darkly” of the perfect reign that we will experience in the Kingdom of God. This doesn’t mean campaigning for Christianization of the country. But it also doesn’t mean leaving laws behind, as if we are unconcerned. It does mean lifting up leaders and policies that serve the common good by enhancing our lives and by creating a community in which all who desire it can go beyond mere obedience and live meaningful lives as faithful citizens.

Why the book of Ruth is not a love story: A study of Ruth 2:1-16

Henry Martinez

I used to think the book of Ruth was a love story. First there is the love Ruth shows Naomi:

“Do not press me to leave you or to turn back from following you! Where you go, I will go; where you lodge, I will lodge; your people shall be my people, and your God my God. Where you die, I will die—there will I be buried. May the Lord do thus and so to me, and more as well, if even death parts me from you!” Ruth 1:16-17

This display of devotion rivals the sentiments of most romantic poems (the good ones at least). And then there is the love between Boaz and Ruth, wrapping it up nicely and providing a colorful backstory for some essential branches in King David’s family tree. But calling the book of Ruth a love story or dramatized genealogy runs the risk of evading a crucial issue of our time. At its heart the book of Ruth is a story of immigration.

We don’t know the reasons for Ruth’s decision to throw her lot in with Naomi. No one is surprised by Naomi’s choice to go back to her homeland, or by Orpah’s choice to go back to her family after her husband dies. But Ruth’s decision to leave the security of her family and homeland to pursue an unpromising future with a fellow widow could only be called foolishness or faith. She is commonly referred to as Ruth the Moabite, which leads us to think her nationality would have been an issue. She takes to gleaning in the fields as a way of ensuring she can feed herself and her mother-in-law. She’s earning no wage for her labor; at most she hopes to glean enough grains for a meal. She catches the attention of Boaz, who learns of her story (at least part of it) from the labor overseer. Thankfully for her, she chose the right field to glean from.

Boaz assures her that she will find protection in his field, safe from the rebuke she presumably would have received from the other field workers or overseers. He also gives her permission to drink from the water they have drawn. She asks what she, a foreigner, has done to earn such favor. Boaz responds:

‘All that you have done for your mother-in-law since the death of your husband has been fully told me, and how you left your father and mother and your native land and came to a people that you did not know before. May the Lord reward you for your deeds, and may you have a full reward from the Lord, the God of Israel, under whose wings you have come for refuge!’ Then she said, ‘May I continue to find favor in your sight, my lord, for you have comforted me and spoken kindly to your servant, even though I am not one of your servants.’ (2:9, 15-16)

Rather than see her as a foreigner and respond in a way which protects his economic interests and preserves the rights of the locals, Boaz extols Ruth’s character. He hears her story and sees her sacrifice and devotion ahead of whatever hindrance her nationality or ethnicity may have presented. Even though the Torah teaches that the poor and foreigners should be allowed to glean in the fields (Leviticus 19:9-10), this does not mean there is universal acceptance of this (especially when Moabites are involved). There are other stories in scripture where anti-Moabite prejudice is allowed (Genesis 19, Numbers 25, Ezra 9). Boaz doesn’t seem to have anything to gain by extending this hospitality to Ruth, but his care for her in spite of the conflicting social custom signifies a deep regard for the vulnerable that offers us a witness worth considering as we reflect on immigration today.

The attitude toward immigrants in the US often ranges from indifference to hostility. A welcome acceptance appears to be rare. Regardless of their story or character, it is more likely that we would welcome them in our fields than our communities. The story of Ruth reminds us that social customs may conflict with our understanding and practice of hospitality. No, God doesn’t explicitly tell Boaz to consider Ruth, but God uses the unfolding events and kindness of Boaz to show us how redemption and care of neighbors can work. Knowing someone’s story makes a difference. Rather than see her as merely a Moabite, Boaz sees Ruth as a person of faith and character, with dignity. Her story can help us explore our own hospitality, and the extent to which we acknowledge its boundaries and our acceptance of social norms.

For more on the importance of examining perceptions of immigrants and welcoming the stranger, see two great articles by Carmelo Santos and Bishop Wayne N. Miller (Metro Chicago synod) in the December issue of the Journal of Lutheran Ethics.

Book Review: Fresh Fruit, Broken Bodies

Henry Martinez

fresh fruit broken bodies In Fresh Fruit, Broken Bodies, Holmes attempts to better understand the “social and symbolic context of suffering among migrant laborers” (29). The book begins with a personal account of a dangerous border crossing, then records his work alongside a particular group of Triqui people (an indigenous group in what is now the Mexican state of Oaxaca) through harvest fields in Washington, California and back to Oaxaca. His explorations progress with the hope that his observations will help change public opinion, practices and policies (29).

The book chronicles Holmes’ journey to understand how the poor suffer, often reading like a sociologist’s annotated field notes. The first-hand interviews and narrative presentation serve two purposes. First, and most obviously, these give the reader a glimpse into the lives of his Triqui companions. Secondly, the author relies heavily on the interviews and narrative to transition to topics that are contextually essential to the issue, but require further analysis beyond the scope of the book (e.g. neoliberal capitalism, North American Free Trade Agreement). As a result the narrative, combined with critical reflection and knowledge of social science research, advances Holmes’ case and signals the need for some additional context.

In the third chapter the author gives a vivid depiction of farm work. His insights not only give the reader a glimpse at some of the issues affecting these laborers, but also explain the segregation of labor, one of the social structures he wants us to challenge. The fourth chapter studies the issue of embodied violence and examines how racism is naturalized (a term the author uses frequently) in the industry. The fifth chapter looks at the health care available to the farm workers, both their access and opportunities in Mexico and the United States. The sixth chapter is devoted to the “public gaze” regarding the farm workers, where the author surveys the systematic effects.

In his analysis Holmes avoids simplistic arguments. Instead, he strives to draw attention to the systematic ways in which populations are marginalized or written off completely. One critical step he acknowledges is combating normalization- seeing the plight of migrant workers (a term which the author interrogates thoroughly) as an unfortunate but inevitable part of the social order. He finds this sort of indifference destructive, and an impediment when working toward respect, and common humanity as far as seeking a solution regarding migration and the U.S.-Mexican border (156). These sorts of conclusions sometimes leave the reader wondering how to work for systematic change, and the author offers a couple anecdotes of how he sees this done.

Since Holmes works, lives, and travels with the Triqui people he is reporting about, his methods of research could be criticized for a lack of objectivity. One would expect a certain degree of empathy, if not bias, would develop when spending a substantial amount of time building relationships with a particular group. On the other hand, the position he assumes makes his claims and analysis tough to dismiss (as he seeks perspective from grower and picker, medical care practitioner and patient). In the end he is able to achieve a unique ethnographic account that fully supports his analysis. Whether or not that analysis is sufficient for his critics is another matter.

Throughout the book I kept wondering whether or not his analysis would be convincing for someone who disagrees with his conclusions. We get the sense that he interviews people who disagree with him, but Holmes doesn’t go into detail about how the conversations took shape or conclude. Of course a lot depends on where the disagreement lies, but overall his case could benefit from a more thorough policy review (i.e. NAFTA and migration). The reader would do well to look into supplement articles and papers from the Economic Policy Institute or other related publications: NAFTA in the New Millennium, (eds. Chambers and Smith) and “NAFTA and Migration.” I have had only a cursory review of these sources and merely recommend them as examples without endorsement of their findings.

This book would be well suited for those interested in issues of race relations and/or work among migrant populations, specifically farm laborers (a population which often exists under the radar in many communities). A common refrain throughout the book is the need to challenge structures that devalue humanity. By identifying the unabashed racism that exists in this system, Holmes is calling us to recognize complicity and work to change it wherever we can.

farm laborer migration Map showing major migration streams in the United States.